Cattle management method and system

ABSTRACT

An automated method and system for individual animal electronic identification, measurement, and management of cattle in a feedlot. Through the use of a computer system integrated with individual animal identification, multiple measurement and remeasurement systems, and a handling and sorting system, animals are individually identified and measured. The computer system calculates optimum slaughter weight, economic end point and marketing date for shipment to a packing plant. Individual animals are sorted by the computer in response to calculations from the measurements. The computer system stores individual animal measurement, performance and location data, which is used to select animals for shipment to slaughter at the optimum time. At the slaughter facility, the animal&#39;s identification is used to correlate the live animal physical characteristics and performance data to the carcass characteristics data and build a database to more accurately identify and measure value-based characteristics in subsequent animals for more effective selection and management.

CROSS REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

This application is a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No.12/251,906, filed Oct. 15, 2008, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,827,934,which is a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 12/167,407,filed Jul. 3, 2008, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,726,258, which is acontinuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 11/701,655, filed Feb.2, 2007, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,464,666, which is a continuationof prior U.S. application Ser. No. 10/903,963, filed Jul. 30, 2004, nowissued as U.S. Pat. No. 7,347,161, which is a continuation of prior U.S.application Ser. No. 10/323,115, filed Dec. 18, 2002, now issued as U.S.Pat. No. 6,805,075, which is a continuation of prior U.S. applicationSer. No. 09/967,151, filed Sept. 27, 2001, now issued as U.S. Pat. No.6,516,746, which is a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No.09/426,412, filed Oct. 25, 1999, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,318,289,which is a continuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 09/227,171,filed Jan. 7, 1999, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,135,055, which is acontinuation of prior U.S. application Ser. No. 08/838,768, filed Apr.10, 1997, now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 6,000,361, which is a continuationof prior U.S. application Ser. No. 08/332,563, filed on Oct. 31, 1994,now issued as U.S. Pat. No. 5,673,647. The entire disclosure of theprior applications is hereby incorporated by reference herein.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention relates generally to the management of cattle in afeedlot for optimum beef quality and optimum return on investment to theproducer and feedlot.

This invention relates more particularly to processes and systems forindividual animal value-based management of cattle for the production ofbeef for human consumption by measuring, sorting and tracking animalsindividually and in groups to manage the diversity in individual animalsfor optimum efficiency and value.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

A feedlot is a place where cattle producers, such as ranchers, sendtheir cattle to promote their growth and improve their condition andcharacteristics before shipment to a meat packer for slaughter.

Feedlots generally care for thousands of head of cattle or other animalsat once in various stages of growth. These animals come from a varietyof sources with widely varying previous care and feeding performancehistory. Cattle within a feedlot are physically contained in cattlepens, each pen typically having a feed bunk to receive feed, a watersource for drinking, and manually-operated gates to enter and exit thepens. A feedlot typically includes a hospital area where individualanimals that are ill or otherwise in need of treatment can be medicatedor otherwise treated and returned to their pens. It also includes areceiving area where cattle are contained upon their arrival at afeedlot, a processing area where cattle, shortly after their arrival,are tagged, weighed and given health care and growth promotant products,and shipping area where cattle are prepared for shipment to a packingplant for slaughter.

Ownership of particular cattle in a feedlot is defined by a unique lotnumber. The number of cattle in a lot may vary, and an owner may own aportion of a lot, a portion of multiple lots, or all of one or morelots. Each lot may occupy one or multiple pens.

Proper care for animals in a large feedlot is a complex andtime-consuming task because of, for example, feeding, water supply,insect control, and individual or group treatment requirements.Treatments may include group treatments where various medications areadded to the feed, or individual treatments that are applied topically,orally, by injection or by implantation to selected individual or groupsof animals. Regular sorting of animals also occurs.

Movement of the animals individually and in groups may occur severaltimes during the several month period each animal is kept in the feedlotdue to the above-mentioned reasons and others. This movement of animalsfrom their home pen to other pens, from a home pen to a treatment areaand later return, and from several pens into a common pen, is necessaryfor the proper care and maintenance of the animals.

Feedlots have various charges assessed to owners for the care andmaintenance of their animals. These charges are typically assessed bylot number at periodic intervals based on feedlot care and maintenancerecords, not on an individual animal basis. Examples of these are feedration charges in dollars per ton, health care and growth promotionproduct charges, a daily yardage fee per head, and handling charges. Foroptimum accuracy of these records and charges, they would be kept on anindividual animal basis, but this is not possible with current feedlotmanagement systems.

Within the feeder cattle population, there is tremendous diversity inindividual animal characteristics due to both genetic and environmentalfactors such as weight, frame size, muscling, fat content and depositionrate, breed type, rate of gain, feed efficiency, intramuscular fat(marbling), sex, age, health and drug treatments, nutrition and growthhistory, and other factors.

Ideally, the physical and growth characteristics of each animal shouldbe known at every stage of its stay in the feedlot in order to determinewhen the animal should be slaughtered for optimum growth efficiency andvalue of the carcass based upon a carcass grading target and marketconditions. However, this is not now possible, as a practical matter, inlarge feedlots, with existing feedlot management methods and systems.

This extreme diversity in the cattle population within a feedlot coupledwith the need to produce a quality end product at the lowest possiblecost for the maximum economic return to the feedlot and the producer,results in a need to be able to measure and track the physical andperformance characteristics of each animal during its residence in thefeedlot for optimum marketing date selection. This is something thatheretofore has not been possible, as a practical matter.

Methods and systems used prior to this invention have been tooinaccurate or have lacked the capability to identify and trackcharacteristics of performance and charges on an individual animalbasis. Additionally, they have been too labor intensive and tooinjurious to animals, and have required skill levels not readilyavailable in feedlots.

The livestock industry has tried for years, with limited success, toimprove the genetics of the cattle population to produce the types ofanimals that will yield a high percentage of lean meat and a lowpercentage of fat efficiently. However, until now there has been noeffective way for large feedlots to measure and sort animalsindividually, keep accurate and complete records of live physicalcharacteristics and charges for each animal, and to produce an economicend point determination for each animal using growth performance data.Nor has there been an effective way to match growth performance data toend product carcass data for each animal from slaughtering operationsthat would enable a correlation between carcass value and live animalperformance and measured characteristics so as to help identify superiorgenetic types for future breeding and management purposes, and toidentify management practices that will maximize the value of thearrival in the market.

The cattle growth and production industry comprises two majorcomponents, producers and feedlots with many grower-type operations inbetween. The cattle producers maintain cow herds. The herds producecalves that are raised and grown on pasture grazing land, much of whichis unsuitable for cultivation. The calves are grown to a certain size,after which they are moved to a confined feedlot where they are fedgrain and other products grown on tillable farmland, in a nutritionallybalanced ration. Although feedlot sizes range from a one-time capacityof a few head to a capacity of over one hundred thousand head, the trendin North America is towards large feedlots in the ten thousand to onehundred thousand head capacity. These larger feedlots feed the majorityof feedlot-fed cattle in North America intended for beef consumption.

The extremely diverse beef cattle population results in an extremelyvariable beef product for the consumer in terms of eating quality,fatness, tenderness, size of cuts and other factors. It has been aprimary goal of the beef industry associations to improve the qualityand uniformity of beef for the American consumer for many years. The1991 Beef Quality Audit identified approximately $280 per head beingwasted, of which more than $150.00 was excess fat. In order to improvethe current beef product, it is first necessary that the current diversecattle population be managed for optimum efficiency and desired carcasscut out quality and value for the consumer. Second, ultimately thegenetic make up of the producer cow herd must be changed based onfeed-back of data concerning the quality and quantity of lean meat yieldfrom carcasses, live performance and the live physical data fromindividual animals. Such data can then be traced to the sire and dam ofeach animal in order to make breeding decisions about the types ofanimals to produce in the future.

While many methods of measurement and selection of cattle in feedlotshave been tried, both visual and automated, none have been successful inaccomplishing the desired end result. That end result is the ability toselect a given animal for shipment at the optimum time, considering theanimal's condition, performance and market factors, the ability to growthe animal to its optimum individual potential of physical and economicperformance, and the ability to record and preserve each animal'sperformance history in the feedlot and carcass data from the packingplant for use in cultivating and managing current and future animals formeat production. The beef industry is extremely concerned with itsdecreasing market share relative to pork and poultry. Yet to date, ithas been unable to devise a system or method to accomplish on a largescale what is needed to manage the current diversity of cattle toimprove the beef product quality and uniformity fast enough to remaincompetitive in the race for the consumer dollar spent on meat.

In order for this problem to be solved, some method and system is neededfor managing cattle in large feedlots which has the ability to identifyand monitor key characteristics of individual animals and manage thoseindividual animals to maximize their individual potential performanceand edible meat value. Such system must further be able to collect,record and store such data by individual animal identification so thatit is usable to improve future animals bred by the producer and managedby the feedlot.

Known Methods and Systems Relating to Feedlot Operations

While others have conceived or used apparatuses or methods intended tosimplify or otherwise improve certain specified aspects of a feedlotoperation, none have been known to address the broader need for a systemand method for managing all aspects of the care, feeding, and marketingof cattle in a feedlot, on an individual animal basis if desired, fromthe time of their arrival to the time of their shipment for slaughter,for optimum feed and drug efficiency, animal health, animal performance,and profit to the feedlot producer.

For example Pratt U.S. Pat. No. 4,733,971, issued Mar. 29, 1988, U.S.Pat. No. 4,889,433, issued Dec. 26, 1989, U.S. Pat. No. 4,815,042,issued Mar. 21, 1989, U.S. Pat. No. 219,224, issued Jun. 15, 1993, andU.S. Pat. No. 5,340,211, issued Aug. 23, 1994, address the problem ofdelivering feed additives into animal feed rations in a feedlotaccurately and on a customized basis at the time of feeding. Pratt U.S.Pat. No. 5,008,821, issued Apr. 16, 1991, addresses the problem ofdetermining accurately the amount of feed ration to deliver to aparticular pen of animals at each feeding. Pratt U.S. Pat. No.5,315,505, issued May 24, 1994, addresses the problem of keeping trackof drug inventories, drugs administered to particular animals, andanimal health histories in a cattle feedlot, and determining what drugsor combinations thereof should be administered, and in what dosages, toa particular animal diagnosed with a specific illness.

While the foregoing patents address important aspects of cattlemanagement in a feedlot, they do not address the broader aspect of how,when and how often to measure, sort, feed and treat animals in afeedlot, how long to feed them, and how and when to select them forshipment from the feedlot.

Hayes U.S. Pat. No. 4,745,472, issued May 17, 1988, and others, haveproposed ways to accurately measure an animal's external dimensions byscanning using video imaging techniques. Similarly, ultrasound backfatmeasurement of cattle is known, at least on an experimental basis, fromthe work of Professor John Brethour of Kansas State University's FortHayes Experimental Station, as explained in an article entitled “CattleSorting Enters a New Age” appearing at pages 1-5 and 8 of the September1994 issue of D.J. FEEDER MANAGEMENT. Professor Brethour has, on anexperimental basis, used the data from such measurements to project anestimated optimum shipping or end date (OED) for the measured animals.

Also, various methods of sorting and weighing cattle have been known orproposed, as disclosed, for example, in Linseth U.S. Pat. No. 4,288,856,Hayes U.S. Pat. No. 4,617,876, and Ostermann U.S. Pat. No. 4,280,448.

Cattle Scanning Systems of Rapid City, S. Dak., markets a computerizedvideo imaging and sorting system that includes weighing and scanningexternal dimensions of each animal, assigning a frame score and musclescore to the animal based on such dimensions, calculating a predictedoptimal end weight and marketing date from the composite score andcurrent weight data, and then sorting the animals for feeding accordingto their optimal marketing dates.

Recently, within the last year, the aforementioned Brethour hassuggested using data from ultrasound backfat measurement of individualanimals, 60-80 days into a feeding period, and a computer modelingprogram, to physically sort cattle into groups according to projectedmarketing dates as they are measured, apparently based on theultrasound-generated data alone.

The aforementioned Hayes U.S. Pat. No. 4,617,876 discloses acomputerized system for controlling, by weight, the movement andlocation of individual animals within one or multiple pens in a feedlotusing a system of animal watering and weighing stalls and electronic eartags to identify each animal. The weight of an animal as measured withinthe stall determines where the animal is routed within sections of a penor among multiple pens. Although the Hayes '876 patent suggestsgenerally that criteria other than weight may be used to control theoperation of a stall exit gate and other gates to route an animal to adesired location, it does not suggest how such other criteria could beefficiently obtained, or that such criteria can be used to determine ananimal's economic and physical performance and value, or to improvefuture feedlot management practices or future breeding and selectionpractices. Nor does it suggest that combinations of two or more criteriamay be used to route an animal or determine its location within multiplepens or other areas.

The aforementioned Linseth patent discloses a computerized method ofsorting animals in a feedlot according to weight gain. Each incominganimal is identified and weighed in a walk-through scale, and itsidentification and weight are recorded. At a later date each animal isreweighed in the walk-through scale and its weight gain is determined.From this determination, the animals are sorted into pens according toweight gain, and underperforming animals are culled from the group.

None of the foregoing methods or systems use more than two criteria forselecting, sorting or predicting an optimal marketing date. Also, noneteaches or suggests a way in which such prior methods or systems mightbe integrated into a total system of cattle management for maximumeconomic return to the feedlot and the producer, and for optimum use ofthe accumulated data for each animal to determine production costs ofeach animal and to improve the genetics of future breeding stocks.

There is a need for such a total management system, and this need isaddressed by the present invention.

OBJECTIVES AND SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

Therefore, a primary objective of the present invention is to provide asystem and method of cattle management in a feedlot that will producethe optimum economic return to the feedlot and producer for each animalin the feedlot.

Other objectives are to provide a method and system as aforesaid that:

(1) enables the accurate determination, tracking and projection ofanimal performance, feed consumption, health history, costs of feed,drugs, and handling, physical characteristics, optimal marketing date,carcass data and profit, on an individual animal basis;

(2) enables efficient and accurate measurement, movement, selection,sorting, and remeasurement and resorting if desired, of animals intogroups for feeding, processing or marketing, based on individual animalfactors other than ownership, type, date of arrival, or the like, foroptimum feeding, treatment, handling and marketing efficiency;

(3) enables the accurate and efficient grouping of animals, and, ifdesired, regrouping of animals, in a feedlot according to similarprojected shipping dates, similar physical characteristics, similar feedration requirements, or any other desired factors or combinationsthereof, without regard to ownership, arrival date, lot number, or thelike; and

(4) enables the accurate and efficient accumulation, recording andcorrelation of historical data, feedlot performance data, and carcassdata for each animal, and the transmission of such data (a) to theproducer for use in the genetic selection and breeding of future animalsfor beef production, and (b) to the feedlot for improving the accuracyof performance, feed and marketing projections for future animals ofsimilar characteristics in the feedlot;

(5) enables the accurate and efficient measurement, selection andtracking of individual animals and their respective physical,performance and carcass characteristics, and the correlation of thosecharacteristics for improved slaughter date and production costprojections, for improved efficiency and value, and for use of such datato more accurately and efficiently breed, select and manage futureanimals;

(6) enables tracking each animal or group of animals from one locationto another in a feedlot, even when mixed with other animals or groups,so that an accurate calculation and allocation of production costs byindividual animal can be determined;

(7) enables the user quickly to review from a remote location anup-to-date cattle inventory by individual or group by location includinghealth and performance status of individual animals after those animalshave been sorted, remixed and retained and fed in a group, along withprojected slaughter dates, production costs and animal growth status sothat the user may use such data to make a decision on the proper date toship a particular animal for slaughter;

(8) provides a high speed, gentle, multiple measurement, selection andsorting system for sorting of animals with diverse characteristics intouniform marketing groups based upon optimum slaughter date, or groupsbased upon uniform physical characteristics, or both, regardless ofownership, original lot number or other commonly used criteria for penallocation; and

(9) allows the user to assign treatment, sorting and movement criteria,and other instructions for cattle management, electronically by cable orRF transmission directly from a remote location to the animal locationfor action that avoids the need for handwritten or printed messages,delays or loss of information.

(10) enables the accurate measurement, tracking and projection of theperformance of individual animals so they may be selected for marketingat a time which will maximize the optimum economic performance of eachanimal.

(11) enables the accurate determination of individual animal projectedmarketing dates utilizing projected incremental production costs ofindividual animals compared to projected market value of such individualanimals and using that data to select individuals or groups of animalsfor shipment for slaughter on a date that will maximize the economicperformance of the individual or group.

To achieve these objectives, a process and system for recording,measuring, sorting and tracking individual animals includes a computersystem for receiving, recording, and storing data by individual animal,and for calculating performance, marketing, sorting, costs and otherinformation from such data by individual animal. Providing such data tothe computer are automatic data entry means accessible at the variousanimal locations. The accuracy and integrity of the data is madepossible by the use of electronic or other automatic identificationdevices on each animal, and by computerized reading of the automaticidentification device and multiple measurements without the need for anoperator visually to interpret measurements and enter them into acomputer keyboard, thus eliminating human error.

To retrieve information or monitor animal performance and cost/valuestatus, operators can remotely access the information with computerterminals, with RF signals such as RF transmitters and receivers, or viacables to other parts of the system.

To achieve these objectives, the invention includes an integratedmeasuring, sorting, performance monitoring, cost allocation and marketselection system that measures and monitors various characteristics ofindividual animals multiple times or in multiple ways, for example:

A) by weight multiple times;

B) by external dimensions; or

C) by internal fat or other tissue characteristics (dimensions ortexture).

It has been determined that previous management methods have notobtained enough individual animal data to (a) accurately measureperformance, (b) project performance and slaughter dates accurately, (c)build an accurate historical database, and (d) quickly and accuratelyidentify a sufficient number of physical characteristics to enableaccurate calculation of performance and value. Also, prior methods andsystems have been unable to measure, project and keep track of animalfeed consumption and production costs accurately on an individual animalbasis.

In a presently preferred embodiment, each animal arriving at a feedlotis directed through a one-way, single-file chute, where it is at leastweighed, identified with an electronic ear tag, and processed such as byimplantation of a growth promotant. It may also be scanned by videoimaging to determine its external dimensions or measured for backfatusing ultrasound, or both. All measurement and processing occurs withincomputer-controlled gated stalls within the single-file chute. Theanimals are then directed to feed pens for an initial feed period.During this initial period the animals may be grouped by ownership,weight, projected marketing date, any other criteria, or even randomly.

In any case, from the initial measurement and historical data available,a projected marketing date, projected average daily gain, and feedproration is calculated for each animal.

Sixty to ninety days into the feeding period, typically atreimplantation time, if required, selected groups of the animals having,for example, similar projected marketing dates, are moved again throughthe single-file chute, where they are reweighed, video-scanned forexternal dimensions, subjected to ultrasound for backfat measurement,and reprocessed (reimplanted) if necessary. From the new data andprevious data, the average actual daily gain is calculated, and feedproration and projected marketing date are recalculated.

Based on the data, the computer system also sorts each animal into oneof seven groups, including “earlier”, “lates”, “sorting group 1”,“sorting group 2”, “flex groups”, “reruns” and “trash”. These groups areautomatically directed into sorting pens, by group as they exit thesingle-file chute. The “trash” group consists of underperforming animalsthat are removed from the feeding process. The “reruns” are animalswhose measurements were not recorded and are sent back through thesingle-file chute for remeasuring and then sorted into one of theremaining groups. The “flex” group consists of animals that arein-between the group 1 and group 2 sort standards. They are sent backthrough the single-file chute identification and then resorted eitherinto group 1 or group 2 to fill out the desired number of animals inthose two groups. The resulting four groups are then moved from thesorting pens to respective feed pens. There they are fed and monitored,and finally selected for shipment to the packing plant, based on theirperformance, projected shipping dates and market conditions. While theanimals are in their feed pens, their weight may be monitored using aportable or permanent identification and weighing system within or closeto the pen. Selection for shipment may be on a group or individualbasis, and may be done manually (visually) or by computer.

When an animal is shipped to the packing plant, its electronic ear taggoes with it so that the animal's carcass data recorded at the packingplant can be correlated to the live animal and to its feedlot andhistorical data. The carcass data for each animal, including grading,cost and market value data, can then be transmitted to the feedlot, andto the producer for use by each, the producer in making breeding,selection or purchase decisions, and the feedlot in making managementdecisions and in allocating costs to the owner on an individual animalbasis.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of the layout of the single-file cattleprocessing chute and sorting pen portion of a feedlot in accordance withthe invention.

FIG. 2 is a schematic diagram of the layout of a pen sorter includingfeed pens, water pens and shipping pens for a feedlot in accordance withthe invention.

FIG. 3 is a cattle processing timeline to exemplify a method ofprocessing and managing cattle in accordance with the invention.

FIGS. 4A, 4B, and 4C are cattle processing diagrams illustrating threealternative methods of processing and managing cattle in a feedlot inaccordance with the method of the present invention.

FIG. 5 is an enlarged schematic diagram of the single-file measuringchute and adjacent sorting pens similar to those shown in FIG. 1, but onan enlarged scale and showing schematically a control means forcontrolling the operation thereof.

FIG. 6 is a block diagram of the computerized control system that may beused for carrying out the present invention.

FIG. 7 is a cattle processing diagram but in considerably greater detailthan those of FIGS. 4A, 4B and 4C to illustrate a method of the presentinvention.

FIG. 8 is a data flow block diagram illustrating the data flow in acomputerized control system according to the present invention.

FIG. 9A is an enlarged schematic diagram of the get ready stall of thesingle-file chute shown in FIGS. 1 and 5, including the locations ofsensors used in such stall.

FIG. 9B is a flow diagram of the computer program used to operate theentrance (tail) gate and exit (head) gate in conjunction with thesensors of FIG. 11A for the get ready station.

FIG. 10A is an enlarged schematic diagram of the video and EID/scalestations of the single-file chute shown in FIGS. 1 and 5, showing thelocations of sensors used in operating the tail and head gates for theEID/scale station.

FIG. 10B is a flow diagram of the computer program used to control theoperations of the tail and head gates for the EID/scale station of FIG.10A in conjunction with the sensors of such station.

FIG. 11A is an enlarged schematic diagram of the ultrasound stationportion of the single-file chute shown in FIGS. 1 and 5 showing thelocations of sensors used in operating the control gates for suchstation.

FIG. 11B is a flow diagram of a computer program used to control theoperation of the tail gate and head gate of the ultrasound station ofFIG. 11A in conjunction with the sensors for such station.

FIG. 12A is an enlarged schematic diagram of the processing station ofthe single-file chute of FIGS. 1 and 5 showing the location of sensorsfor operating the control gates of such station.

FIG. 12B is a flow diagram of a computer program used to control theoperation of the tail gate and head gate for the processing station ofFIG. 12A in conjunction with the sensors at such station.

FIG. 13A is an enlarged schematic diagram of the sort pen entrance gatesfor the sort pens shown in FIG. 5.

FIG. 13B is a flow diagram of a computer program used to control theoperation of the entrance gates to the sort pens of FIG. 13A.

FIG. 14A-B is a flow diagram of a computer program used to control theprocessing sequence for each animal proceeding through the variousmeasuring and processing stations in the single-file chute of FIG. 5.

FIG. 15, is a flow diagram of the overall process control computerprogram for controlling the operation of the various computer-operateddevices and equipment of the management system of the invention.

FIG. 16 is a flow diagram of a station initialization computer programfor the various measuring and processing stations of the single-filechute shown in FIG. 5.

FIG. 17 is a flow diagram of a computer program used to update the datafor each computer-operated measuring apparatus at each measuring andprocessing station of the system.

FIG. 18 is a flow diagram of a station setup computer program used toprepare each station for the receipt of an animal for measuring andprocessing.

FIG. 19 is a flow diagram of a computer program used to ensure thecapture of an animal within a measuring or processing station beforemeasurements or processings are initiated at the station in thesingle-file chute shown in FIG. 5.

FIGS. 20A-B are a flow diagram of a computer program used for makingmeasurements at the various measuring stations of the single-file chute,including weight, external dimension and internal measurements.

FIG. 21 is a flow diagram of a computer program used for preparing astation or a sort pen for releasing an animal from the station or sortpen to another destination.

FIG. 22 is a flow chart of a computer program used for reading theultrasound backfat data of an animal at the ultrasound measuring stationof the single-file chute shown in FIG. 5.

FIG. 23 is a flow chart of a computer program used to interface theprocess control and other computers used for collecting data at thevarious feedlot measuring, processing and sorting stations or pens withthe main feedlot business system (FBS) computer so that data can bepassed back and forth between the FBS computer and the variousprocessing computers used in the overall computer control system.

FIG. 24 is a flow diagram of a computer program used for loading stationconfiguration information into the computer system for a particularfeedlot cattle management system.

FIG. 25 is a flow diagram illustrating the process and formulas forcalculating “Days to Finish”, followed by an example calculation basedon hypothetical animal measurements.

FIG. 26 is a flow diagram illustrating an alternative method to that ofFIG. 25 for calculating “Days to Finish” for an individual animal,followed by an example calculation based on hypothetical measurements ofthe animal.

FIG. 27 is a flow diagram illustrating the process of determining feedproration to individual animals following a first set of animalmeasurements in the feedlot.

FIGS. 28 a and 28 b are a flow chart illustrating the process ofdetermining feed proration to individual animals in a feedlot followinga second and subsequent sets of animal measurements in the feedlot.

FIG. 29 is a flow diagram showing how calculations of “Days to Finish”from FIGS. 25 and 26 can be used to create an average “Days to Finish”for projecting when an individual animal will be ready to ship from afeedlot.

FIG. 30 is a graph plotting selling price against animal backfat alongtwo different curves during the time that an animal is on feed in afeedlot.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS

A. Description of Feedlot

FIG. 1 illustrates a feedlot 10 which would typically include a seriesof feed pens (not shown) where cattle would be fed selected feed rationsand watered during their stay in the feedlot. For example, four feedpens A, B, C and D are illustrated schematically in FIG. 7. In additionto feed pens, a feedlot incorporating the cattle management system andmethod of the invention includes an alley 12 leading through a series ofmanually or power-operated gates 14, 16, 18 and a one-way gate 20 to achute 22.

Alley 12 leads from an alley 24 which communicates with both feed pensand receiving and holding pens, where cattle are received and held for ashort period upon their delivery to the feedlot from a producer. Theintersection of alley 24 and the alley 12 leading to the chute 22 isgated as indicated at 26 and 28 to control the admission of cattle intoalley 12 leading to the chute and to control the exit of cattle fromsorting pens indicated at 30.

The gates 14, 16 and 18 subdivide the upper curved portion of alley 12into cattle holding sections 190, 192 of about 40 head apiece so as tocontrol the delivery of cattle into a crowding section 32 through crowdgate 18. Crowding section 32 narrows from its entrance to the one-waygate 20 so that cattle are forced single file through the gate 20 andinto the chute area 22 which is a single-file chute.

Chute section 22 is subdivided into a series of longitudinally arrangedstations 34, 36, 38, 40 and 42. These five stations are separated fromone another and from the entrance 44 to the chute by entrance and exitgates 46, 48, 50, 52, 54, 56. The stations defined by these gates areonly large enough to receive one animal at a time. The opening andclosing of these gates are controlled by position sensors such asphotoelectric cells under computer control to control the one at a timemovement of animals through the chute. A larger scale depiction of thechute will be seen in FIG. 5.

Just downstream of the single-file chute are a series of the previouslymentioned sorting pens 30, there being nine such pens illustrated inFIG. 1, including pens 30A, 30B, 30C, 30D, 30E, 30F, 30G, 30H and 30I.Below these pens in FIG. 1 is an alley 58 leading from the left-hand penexits to the alleys 12 and 24. In addition, there is a single-filenarrow alley 60 between the left-hand series of sorting pens 30A, 30C,30D, 30E, 30G and the right-hand series of sorting pens 30B, 30D, 30Fand 30H. From the layout of FIG. 1 it will be apparent that any animalproceeding through the chute and not sorted into one of the sortinggates 30A-30H will automatically end up in sorting pen 30I.

Alley 60 is normally isolated from the entrances to each of the eightsorting pens 30A-30H by a computer-operated entrance gate 62 at theentrance to each sorting pen. It will be noted that there is no entrancegate to the final sorting pen 30I. Each sorting pen also has an exitgate 64 at its opposite end opening into an alley used to direct thecattle from the sorting pens to another destination to be described ingreater detail below. The exit gates 64 on pens 30A, 30C, 30E and 30G onthe left-hand side of the alley 60 in FIG. 1 open into an alley 66leading through control gates 68, 70 back to alley 58 where cattle canbe directed either back through alley 12 or into alley 24 leading to thefeed pens.

Each station of the single file chute 22 is set up either to prepareeach animal for measurement or processing, or to actually measure orprocess the animal. For example, in FIG. 1, station 34 is termed the“get ready” station where one animal is admitted from the chute entrancearea 44. Once the animal enters the “get ready” station 34, gate 46closes and gate 48 remains closed so the animal remains isolated at thatstation. Then gate 48 is opened so that the animal enters the nextstation 36. Station 36 is where certain external dimensions of eachanimal are measured. This is preferably done through a video-imagingdevice or scanner suitable for this purpose such as one knowncommercially as an MSI Scanner available from Cattle Scanning Systems(C.S.S.) of Rapid City, S. Dak. Another video-imaging measurement systemfor cattle is disclosed in Hayes, U.S. Pat. No. 4,745,472.

After the animal's external dimensions are measured, gate 50 is openedand the animal proceeds into the third station 38 in the chute whichcontains a scale on which the animal is weighed. The scale used can beany of a number of commercially available scales but should be capableof generating an electronic signal for recording the weight at a remotelocation. Also at the scale station or at another desired station, anelectronic identification (EID) tag is attached to the animal's ear.This EID tag remains attached to the animal throughout its residence inthe feedlot and its shipment to the packing plant where it is removedupon slaughter. Through this EID tag, the animal can not only beidentified but its location can be tracked and its measurement andperformance data correlated to the animal throughout the duration of itsfeedlot stay, through its shipment to the packing plant, and untilslaughter. One suitable EID tag for this purpose is manufactured byAllflex International and is described in greater detail in U.S. Pat.No. 5,315,505, issued May 24, 1994, to the assignee of the presentapplication. The disclosure of U.S. Pat. No. 5,315,505 is incorporatedherein by reference. The Allflex EID tag is a transponder which operatesthrough a nearby antenna and an integrator reader also available fromAllflex International. Each EID tag emits a signal unique to the animalto which it is attached, which is electronically “read” by the antennaand communicated to a host computer via a computer interface unit.

After an animal's weight is recorded and its EID tag attached, it movesthrough gate 52 to the next measuring station 40 where its internalbackfat content is measured using an ultrasound measuring means andtechnique. For this purpose, the animal must be held fairly still,station 40 is a “squeeze chute”, well known in the feedlot industry. Thesqueeze chute has a rear gate that pushes against the rear of an animalwhile its head is stabilized in a “head catcher”. The ultrasound backfatmeasuring system used at station 40 is one that has been adapted fromthe experimental system used by Professor John Brethour at Kansas StateUniversity's Fort Hays Experiment Station, described in the September,1994 issue of D J Feeder Management magazine.

After backfat measurement, the gate 54 is opened and the animal proceedsto station 42 for processing. Station 42 is also a squeeze chute.Typically, processing at station 42 will include individual drugadministration, growth hormone implantation, castration and dehorning.After processing, the chute gate 56 is opened and the animal is sortedinto one of the sorting pens in a manner to be described hereinafter.

The enlarged schematic version of the single-file chute 22 shown in FIG.5 is sufficiently similar to the chute 22 shown schematically in FIG. 1that the same reference numerals will be used in describing both chutes.With reference to FIG. 5, it includes the same five processing andmeasuring stations 34, 36, 38, 40 and 42 as in FIG. 1. However, at thedownstream end of the chute 22 of FIG. 5 there are only seven sortingpens 30 shown and designated sort pens 1-7, rather than nine such pensas shown in FIG. 1.

As shown most clearly in FIG. 5, the single-file chute includes at itsdownstream end just downstream of chute exit gate 56 from the processingstation 42 a pair of access gates 72, 74 for the admission of feedlotpersonnel into the chute when necessary. These gates may be manuallyoperated.

From FIG. 5 it will also be apparent that sorting into one of theseveral sorting pens is accomplished after each animal proceeds throughall five stations of the chute by opening an entrance gate to one of thesorting pens while the others remain closed. Thus, for example, if ananimal is to be sorted into sorting pen 3 in FIG. 5 its entrance gate 62would open to the position 62 a shown while the entrance gate 62 to allother sorting pens remain closed, thereby directing the animal intosorting pen 3.

As previously mentioned, each sorting pen entrance gate 62 and each ofthe chute gates 46, 48, 50, 52, 54 and 56 is operated via positionsensors indicated schematically at 76 in FIG. 5 in conjunction with ahost computer 78 through chute gate interfaces indicated schematicallyat 80.

Similarly, sort pen entrance gates 62 are operated by the positionsensors 82 controlled by the host computer 78 through the sort gateinterfaces 84.

The measurement taken at each of the measuring stations 36, 38 and 40 ofthe chute, for each animal passing through the chute, transmits a signalindicative of the measurement for that animal through an appropriateinterface to the host computer 78, where the measurement data is enteredand stored for use in calculating various performance characteristics ofthe animal.

Each measurement is correlated with a specific animal through theanimal's EID tag as it passes from station to station through the chute.More specifically, the video imaging measurement (VIM) data istransmitted through a VIM interface 86 to the host computer 78. Weightdata for the same animal is transmitted from the scale at station 38through a scale interface 88 to the host computer 78. Then theultrasound backfat data for the same animal is transmitted through theUSBF interface 90 to the host computer 78. Finally, any drugsadministered to the animal or other procedures performed on the animalat the processing station 42 are transmitted through the processinginterface 92 to the host computer where such data is correlated with theanimal processed.

Reference is made to the aforementioned U.S. Pat. No. 5,315,505 for adetailed description of how animal health data and drug administrationdata would be entered into the host computer from a processing stationfor a given animal.

With reference to FIG. 2, a pen sorter 94 is disclosed that is uniquelysuited for use as an integral part of the system of the invention andfor carrying out the method thereof. There could be one or several pensorters 94 in a feedlot. Also, it is possible that the sorting portionof the pen sorter 94, which portion is to be described presently, couldbe designed as a portable unit that would be transported to a particularfeed pen within the feedlot for use there within the 30 days or so priorto scheduled shipment of the group of animals within the feed pen sothat the shipment date for each animal in the pen could be optimized formaximum feed efficiency and value.

In any case, the pen sorter is designed to enable weighing of individualanimals on a frequent basis, such as daily or even more frequently,without removing the animals from their feed pens and without the needto send them back through the single-file chute described with respectto FIGS. 1 and 5.

The illustrated pen sorter 94 is subdivided into two feed pens 95, 96designated feed pen A and feed pen B, separated by a partition or fence97. Each feed pen in turn is also separated by partitions 98, 99 fromadjacent water pens 100, 101, designated water pen A and water pen B.Water pens A and B are, in turn, separated from adjacent shipping pens102, 103 by partitions 104, 105, the shipping pens being designated shippen A and ship pen B. The ship pens in turn are separated from oneanother by another fence or partitions 106. Each feed pen includes afeed bunk 108 into which the daily feed ration of the animals in thosepens is deposited and to which the animals in the feed pen have readyaccess. The water pens and ship pens are provided with respectivewatering troughs 110, 111, 112 and 113 so that the animals within thosepens can access drinking water as desired.

The heart of the pen sorter 94 is its array of gates for directinganimals in the feed pens A and B to desired locations within the largerconfines of the pen sorter 94, on an individual animal basis, based onmeasured performance characteristics of each animal, other data such asmarket conditions, and a desired shipping date.

First it should be noted that animals within feed pen A are free to passbetween such pen and its adjacent water pen A through a two-way gate 114to access feed and water as desired. The same is true with respect toanimals within feed pen B through a two-way gate 115 between feed pen Band water pen B. However, unless desired by feedlot personnel ordictated by the management system, cattle cannot pass from one feed pento another or from one water pen to another and cannot pass from eitherwater pen into either shipping pen.

A single scale stall 116 is positioned between water pen A and water penB and is sized to accept one animal at a time. The scale stall isequipped with one scale at 117, which can be of a type similar to thatused in the scale station of the single-file chute as previouslydescribed. The scale is set up to transmit automatically the weightreading of an animal through a suitable interface to the host computer.To identify the animal being weighed, the stall is also equipped with anEID tag identification means as previously described for receiving andtransmitting the identification of an animal being weighed to the hostcomputer.

Access to the scale stall is either from feed pen A or feed pen B, asdesired, through one of two shuttle gates 118, 120. Both shuttle gates118 and 120 comprise a pair of parallel gate arms 121, 122 which move inunison from a scale entrance position, as shown with respect to shuttlegate 120, to a scale blocking position, as shown with respect to shuttlegate 118 in FIG. 2. When in its scale blocking position, each shuttlegate has its arms 121, 122 directed toward a one-way gate leading intothe adjacent water pen. For example, feed pen A shows shuttle gate 118with its shuttle arms in a position for directing animals through theone-way gate 124 into water pen A. When shuttle gate 120 is in acomparable position, its arms would direct cattle through a one-way gate126 into water pen B. Thus, depending on the position of shuttle gate118, animals from feed pen A can be directed either through one-way gate124 into water pen A or into the scale stall 117. A one-way gate 128 atthe entrance to the scale stall prevents an animal that has entered thescale stall from backing out. Similarly, an animal within feed pen B canbe directed by shuttle gate 120 either into the scale stall 117 to beweighed or through the one-way gate 126 into water pen B.

Of course, it will apparent that an animal in feed pen A or in feed penB can at any time pass through the two-way gates 114 and 115 betweenthose pens and their respective water pens A and B, and back again totheir respective feed pens. It will also be apparent that any animalwithin water pen A can also pass through a one-way gate 130 back to feedpen A. However, unless other control gates are operated, an animal inwater pen A cannot pass to either shipping pen A or shipping pen B orinto feed pen B. Similarly, any animal in water pen B can pass througheither the two-way gate 115 or a one-way gate 132 back to feed pen B butcannot pass into shipping pen B, feed pen A or water pen A withoutoperation of appropriate control gates.

Once an animal is within the scale stall 116, it must pass forwardly outof the stall through a complex array of sorting gates indicatedgenerally at 134 into one of four pens, either water pen A, shipping penA, water pen B, or shipping pen B. The operation of the sorting gatearray 134 is under computer control. The scale stall 116 is providedwith an ED tag antenna to identify the animal within the scale stall tothe computer system, which then determines which pen the animal is toproceed to from the scale stall, after which the computer operates thesorting gate array 134 in a manner to direct the animal to theappropriate pen.

Sorting gate array 134 includes three controllable shuttle gates 136,137 and 138. In addition, it includes a one-way gate 140 leading fromthe sorting area just downstream from the scale stall into water pen A,a one-way gate 142 leading from the same sorting area into shipping penA, a third one-way gate 144 leading from the sorting area into shippingpen B and a fourth one-way gate 146 leading from the sorting area intowater pen B.

The following will illustrate that an animal in, for example, feed pen Acan be directed through the scale stall 116 and then either back to feedpen A, to feed pen B, to shipping pen A or to shipping pen B. The sameis true with respect to an animal in feed pen B. Thus, pen sorter 94 iscapable of effecting a four-way sort.

To illustrate, an animal in feed pen A with the shuttle gate 118 in theposition shown, can pass freely between feed pen A and water pen A andback to feed pen A. However, with the shuttle gate 118 shifted to itsposition shown in dashed lines in FIG. 2, an animal in feed pen A willbe directed through the one-way gate 128 into the scale stall 116 whereit will be weighed and identified to the computer through its EID tag.The computer will then determine to which pen it should be sorted fromthe scale stall and actuate the appropriate gates to accomplish thedesired sort. For example, if it is desired to return the animal to feedpen A, sorting gate 136 is shifted downward to its dashed line positionshown thereby allowing the animal to move through the sorting area andthrough the one-way gate 140 back to water pen A where it can movefreely back to feed pen A, either through the two-way gate 114 or theone-way gate 130.

If it is desired that the animal be sorted from feed pen A to feed penB, sort gate 136 is shifted upward to its dashed line position shown,allowing the animal to travel from the scale stall freely through thesorting area and one-way gate 146 to water pen B, from which the animalcan move freely through either two-way gate 115 or one-way gate 132 tofeed pen B.

If it is desired that the animal move from the scale stall 116 toshipping pen A, sort gate 136 is moved to its downward position in FIG.2 and control gate 137 is moved to its upward position shown in dashedlines in FIG. 2, enabling the animal to travel through the sorting areaand through one-way gate 142 into shipping pen A.

If it is desired that the animal move from the scale stall to shippingpen B, sorting gate 136 is moved upward, control gate 138 is moveddownward to its dashed line position, and the animal can thus movefreely through the sorting area and one-way gate 144 into shipping penB.

From the foregoing it will be understood that animals within feed pens Aand B can be weighed as frequently as desired and sorted four wayswithout moving the animals any appreciable distance. Thus the pen sorter94 provides an ideal finishing pen for use in determining the exact daywithin a shipping window of several days when an animal should beshipped to the packing plant for slaughter to realize the maximum returnon the investment in such animal, considering animal performance, marketconditions and feed efficiency.

B. Cattle Management System and Process

FIG. 3 illustrates a hypothetical timeline in the management of cattlein accordance with the invention.

Upon arrival of a lot of cattle in the feedlot, or before, the priorhistory of the lot would be entered in the host computer 78, asindicated at 148. Such prior history data is illustrated, for example,in the cattle received report by “load” shown in Table 3A. The reportindicates such things as the date the load was received, the loadnumber, the number of head in the load, the sex of the cattle in theload and the average weight of the animals in the load. It alsoindicates cost information. It also gives information such as the age ofthe cattle, the breed, the type of pasture the load has been on andhealth, nutrition, stress and weather conditions applicable to the load.It also indicates the number of days the load has been feeding onpasture. Some or all of this data may be used in later calculations bythe computer to determine the optimum end date (OED) or days to finish(DTF), of the group or individual animals in the group. This date isalso sometimes referred to as the optimum marketing or shipping date.

On the day of their arrival, indicated on the timeline at 150, eachanimal in the load is measured, processed and electronically identifiedwith an HD tag in the one-way single-file chute 22 previously described.Then, if desired, the measured and processed animals may be sorted intothe sorting pens 30 in a rough sort by type (breed), weight, age, or afirst estimated OED or DTF, although such a first “rough” first sort isoptional.

From the sorting pens, the animals are moved to feed pens, either bysort or on an ad hoc basis, where they are fed for a period of time,such as 45 days as shown in FIG. 3, although possibly substantiallylonger than that.

If a 45 day weight or measurement is desired for the animals, they wouldbe moved from their feed pens on the 45th day as indicated at 152 backthrough the single-file chute, where they would be remeasured. From theinitial measurement and remeasurement data, the performance of eachanimal would be calculated by the computer, and its performanceassessed. The animals would then be sorted into the sorting pens 30according to their performance characteristics. Poorly performinganimals would be culled from the group and removed from the feedlotoperation as “salvage”. The remaining resorted animals would be returnedto the feed pens according to their sorts.

Then 60-120 days into the feeding period, indicated by the range 154 inFIG. 3, the animals from at least two feed pens at once would be movedfrom their pens back through the single-file chute for remeasuring onceagain on an individual basis. The data from these measurements togetherwith prior data for each animal would be used by the computer tocalculate a new OED or DTF for each animal and other performancecriteria, such as average daily gain (ADG) and feed proration for eachanimal. From the single-file chute the animals would be resorted onceagain according to predetermined criteria such as DTF or OED. Aprojected shipping sequence for each animal could also be calculated atthis time. Then the animals would be returned to the feed pens accordingto the newly determined sorts. The animals then could be removed fromtheir pens for shipment according to their calculated shipping sequence.Whenever an animal is moved in the feedlot, its identification and data,via computer, moves with it. Its location at any time can be determinedremotely by computer, and its performance data assessed.

Alternatively, a portable pen sorter of the type shown in FIG. 2 couldbe installed in the feed pen. Each animal would be carefully monitoredand weighed, perhaps on a daily basis, until it reached its optimumshipping weight or value, at which time it would be shipped to thepacker, indicated at 156.

Alternatively, animals within the feed pens could be sent to a finishingpen such as the pen sorter 94 shown on FIG. 2 where it would beconfined, monitored and weighed frequently within a shipping window suchas a 30 day shipping window. Within that shipping window indicated at158, each animal as determined by frequent weight checks and marketconditions, would be directed from its feed pen, such as feed pen A orfeed pen B in FIG. 2, to appropriate shipping pen A or B when it isready for shipment.

Alternatively, during an animal's shipping window, the animal could beweight checked simply by sending it back through the single-file chuteperiodically until it reaches its ideal shipping weight, at which timeit would be shipped to the packer 156.

Alternatively, a specific shipping date for a given animal could bedetermined by issued inspection while the animals are within their30-day shipping window.

When the animal leaves the feedlot, its ED tag travels with it. Itshistorical and performance data records would be maintained by thefeedlot, indicated at 160, and also transmitted to the producer,indicated at 162. At the same time, the packer would record the carcassdata for each slaughtered animal, identified by its HD tag, and transmitthe carcass data, as indicated at 164, to the feedlot and producer forcorrelation with the animal's live performance data from the feedlot.

The correlation can be useful to the feedlot in projecting optimum enddates (OED), initial feed proration and production costs for futureanimals of a given type and similar history. This data can also beuseful to cattle producers in determining which breeds and individualbreeding animals are most desirable from the standpoint of market valueand producing the best quality of beef. The important thing to note isthat the performance of each animal is tracked on an individual basisfrom the time it arrives in the feedlot until the time it is shipped andslaughtered, when its carcass data is collected and correlated with itsperformance data for use by the feedlot and producer in managing futurebeef production.

Another important feature of the system is its ability to update anindividual animal's performance projections on a daily basis. Forexample, the DTF for an animal will be current for the day theprojection is assessed. The same is true for other projections such asprojected weight, etc.

Although FIG. 3 illustrates one possible processing sequence of cattleincluding measuring and remeasuring steps and sorting and resortingsteps for optimum feed efficiency and return, many other sequences arepossible as illustrated in FIGS. 4A, 4B and 4C. For example in thesequences of FIGS. 4A, 4B and 4C the 45 day remeasurement is eliminatedand instead a single 60-75 day remeasurement and uniformity sort areperformed.

Referring to FIG. 4A, a load of cattle is received in the feedlot at 166and within a few hours, measured at 167 and processed at 168 in thesingle-file chute. From the chute they are directed into the feed pensat 169 without an initial sort. They are fed in the feed pens for 60-75days, then returned to the single-file chute for remeasuring at 170 andpossibly reimplantation of a growth hormone, if necessary. Afterremeasuring, the animals undergo a uniformity sort as determined by thecomputer, and directed into the appropriate sorting pens 172. Uponcompletion of the sorting operation, they are returned to the feedingpens 174 according to their sort groups and there fed for a period of 60to 80 days. As the cattle within the feed pens approach their individualoptimum end dates they would be selected for shipment either visually,by remeasurement at the single-file chute, or by frequent reweighing ina portable pen sorter of the type shown in FIG. 2. Following selectionat step 176 the animal would be shipped as at 178 to the packer.

The processing sequence of FIG. 4B for an individual animal is the samedown through the initial receiving, measuring and processing steps.However after measuring and processing, according to FIG. 4B there is aninitial sort step 180 that can be a rough type sort as in FIG. 3 or canbe based on a first rough estimated optimum end date for each individualanimal. Following the first sort 180, the animals are directed by sortgroup into feed pens at 169 for a feeding period of 60-75 days. At theend of the 60-75 day period the animals are removed from their pens,either individually or in groups, and returned to the single-file chutefor remeasuring at 170.

After remeasuring in the single-file chute, each animal is resorted at182 by the computer, which opens the appropriate sorting gates of thesorting pens 30. From the sorting pens, the animals are redirected backto the feed pens at 174 and placed into the pens according to theirsorting groups. They remain in the feed pens for a period of 60-80 days,after which they are individually, or by group, selected for shipment,according to their last calculated OED. As previously indicated, thisselection for shipment can be fine-tuned through the use of either aportable pen sorter or the pen sorter 94 of FIG. 2. After selection, theselected animals are shipped at step 178 to the packing plant forslaughter, where the carcass data and EID tag are collected.

The optional cattle processing procedure of FIG. 4C is the same as theprocedure outlined in FIG. 4A down through the initial sorting step 172.However, thereafter the animals, according to the procedure in FIG. 4 c,are directed back to the feed pens according to sorting group at step173 for a feeding period of only 30-40 days. Thereafter, the animals, orat least selected animals, from the feed pens are removed to finish feedpens, such as pen sorters 94 in FIG. 2, for a finish feeding step 175for an additional 30-40 days, which represents the shipping window 158indicated in FIG. 3. Within the finish feeding pens, the animals can besorted, resorted, weighed, reweighed and selected on an individualanimal basis for sorting to one of the two shipping pens A and B forshipment to the packer at step 178.

C. Cattle Processing Example

FIG. 7 illustrates, in greater detail, a representative cattleprocessing sequence in a feedlot according to the system and process ofthe present invention. Steps in the processing sequence are numbered 1-9along the left-hand side of FIG. 7.

In step 1, as indicated at 184, several lots of cattle arrive at thefeedlot at about the same time, indicated as lots 1-4. When they arrive,the previous history data of the lots and individual animals in the lotsis entered into the host computer by data entry means (not shown) suchas a computer keyboard. The previous history, as already mentioned, mayinclude information such as shown in Table 3A.

According to step 2, after the cattle arrive they are directed intoreceiving or holding pens 186, typically by lot, where they are heldjust prior to initial processing. The time spent in the holding pens 186will depend on when the lots arrived in the feedlot. For example, whenthey arrive in the middle of a night, they would be retained in theholding pens until feedlot personnel arrive early the next morning toprocess them. When ready for processing, the cattle from the holdingpens 186 are directed through the appropriate alleys to the one-waysingle-file chute 22 where they are one-by-one led through the variouschute stations, sequentially, including the get ready station 34, thevideo image measuring station 36, the weighing station 38 and theultrasound backfat measuring station 40. During this process the EID andvisual eartags are applied as well, and the measurement data from eachof these stations is transmitted through the appropriate interfaces tothe host computer 78 for recording, collection and storage. At theprocessing station 42 each animal is implanted with a growth hormone,given medication as needed, and dehorned and castrated as needed.

Using available information and data on the group being processed andthe individual animals in the group, an initial optimum end date (OED)is determined, either through calculation by the computer or by theoperator. A marketing target grade for each animal and for the group (anaverage) is also assigned, either by the operator from a list of data orthrough calculation by the computer, depending on the capability of thecomputer program used. In addition, at this point a projected feedintake for each animal is calculated and assigned and used in proratingthe total feed ration used by a group of animals within a single feedpen, so that a fairly accurate cost of feed per animal can be calculatedand assessed to the owner.

Referring to FIG. 25, the process and formulas for calculating “days tofinish” (DTF) is illustrated, followed by an example calculation basedon hypothetical measurements of an animal passing through thesingle-file chute.

Referring to FIG. 26, an alternative method of calculating DTF for anindividual animal is disclosed. Following the figure is an examplecalculation based on hypothetical measurements taken at two differentmeasuring dates during an animal's feeding period at the feedlot.

Using the method of FIG. 25, an animal arriving at the feedlot, afterbeing measured in the single-file chute, is calculated to have aprojected DTF of 141 days. This represents the total number of days theanimal is projected to be at the feedlot before it is ready for shipmentto the packing plant. However, according to FIG. 26, the same animalusing the different method of FIG. 26, is calculated to have a DTF of165 days, based on its initial measurements upon arrival at the feedlot.

In Table 1 there are set forth limiting factors to DTF projections basedon maximum and minimum live weight for the animal. An examplecalculation follows. According to the calculation, if a maximum hotcarcass weight of 800 pounds and a minimum hot carcass weight of 500pounds is desired in the end product, the maximum live weight of theanimal should be 1230 pounds and the minimum live weight of the animalshould be limited to 768 pounds. Thus, if the OFW (optimum finishweight) as used in the example calculation following FIG. 25 results ina maximum live weight that exceeds 1230 pounds or a minimum live weightof less than 768 pounds, the maximum or minimum live weights from theexample calculation of Table 1 should be used in the FIG. 25 calculationrather than the optimum finish weight (OFW) originally used.

It will be noted that the formula and calculation of FIG. 25 includes a“Cornell Cattle Systems” formulation. This is a well-known formula inthe cattle industry which includes inputs of OFW, condition score(backfat measurement), current weight, ration, environmental factors,feed additives and input program used.

FIG. 27 shows the calculation and the process of calculating feedproration to each animal as determined following the first set ofmeasurements at the single-file chute. FIG. 27 is followed by an examplecalculation using the formula and method indicated in the figure. In thefigure DMI indicates dry matter intake for a given feed period and isindicated hereinafter as (DMI). In the same method of calculation theADG indicates the average daily gain for a given animal. All othermeasurements used in the formula will be self-explanatory. As indicatedin the formula, the frame score is determined by a formula using bothhip height and current weight. The condition score for an animal isdetermined using both the backfat measurement and current weight. In theexample, the proration of feed fed in a given period (P1) is calculatedfor each animal From the calculation a proration ratio is indicated andapplied to the 780 total pounds of feed fed to a pen of four animalsduring the P1 feed period, resulting in a feed period total proration offeed among the four animals as indicated in the last column of thecalculation. It will be noted that of the four animals, the prorationranges from a low of 190.9 pounds to a high of 206.2 pounds. This feedproration formula and calculation is used only for the first feed periodfollowing the first measurement of the animals. Following the second andsubsequent measurements, a different feed proration formula andcalculation is used as indicated in FIGS. 28 a and 28 b.

FIG. 29 illustrates how the calculations of DTF from FIGS. 25 and 26(DTF1 and DTF2) can be used to create an average DTF (DTF3) for use inprojecting when an individual animal will be ready to be shipped fromthe feedlot. The numbers used in FIG. 25, 26 and FIG. 29 arecoefficients that are obtained empirically from experience feedingcattle at a prototype feedlot managed in accordance with the method andsystem of the invention. The coefficients are defined and correlatedwith the coefficient numbers used, in Table 2.

TABLE 1 Limiting factors to DTF Projections Maximum Live Weight (Max_LW)Minimum Live Weight (Min_LW) Max_LW = (Max_HCW*1.54) −(OBF*2.540005*69.91) + 69.47 Min_LW = (Min_HCW*1.54) −(OBF*2.540005*69.9l) + 69.47 Maximum Hot Carcass Weight (Max_HCW): UserInput Minimum Hot Carcass Weight (Min_HCW): User Input Optimum Backfat(OBF): User Input Example Calculations User Inputs: Max_HCW: 800 lbsMin_HCW: 500 lbs OBF: 0.40 in. for frame score 4 Max_LW = (800*1.54) −(0.40*2.540005*69.91) + 69.47 = 1230 lbs Min_LW = (500*1.54) − (0/40*2.540005*69.91) + 69.47 = 768 lbs

TABLE 2 DTF Calculation Coefficients Frame - Linear Regression EquationC-1 Intercept for Regression Equation (=18.091475) C-2 Estimate forWeight parameter (0.03365) C-3 Estimate for Hip Height parameter(1.121666) C-4 Estimate for the parameter of Current Weight divided byHip Height (2.003599) C-5 Estimate for the parameter of Hip HeightSquared (−0.012205) C-6 Estimate for the parameter of Current Weightdivided by Hip Height Squared (13.133611) BFDR-1 Linear RegressionEquation C-7 Intercept (0.01252987) C-8 Estimate for Frame ScoreParameter (−0.00064982) BFDR-2 Logarithmic Regression Equation C-9 Lowerlimit fat Depostion Rate (0.00668) C-10 Upper limit Fat Depostion Rate(0.01188) New Frame C-11 Upper Deposition Rate (−0.01253) C-12 LowerDeposition Rate (−0.00065) OBF - Conversion Tables for Frame to Back FatDTF1 - Logarithmic Regression Equation OFW - Regression Equation OFW -Regression Equation C-13 Intercept (366.7) C-14 Estimate for OFW (33.3)C-15 Pounds to Kilogram Conversion Factor (2.2) ADG - Cornell ModelOutput of ADG

The following example illustrates how a final DTF calculation can bemade for determining exactly when an animal should be shipped toslaughter, based on economics (value) and the prior DTF1 and DTF2calculations of FIGS. 25 and 26. FIG. 30 is a graph that plots sellingprice (left-hand vertical line) and backfat on the animal (right-handvertical line) along two different curves, in terms of the number ofdays the animal is on feed (DOF). From the calculations and plotting itis determined, in the example, that the point P4 on the backfat curveshould be selected for shipment of the animal. This is at 140 days intothe feeding period, the most economical point for shipping. Beyond thatpoint, the animal's backfat will exceed 0.7 inches, resulting in theanimal's carcass being degraded and thus becoming less valuable. The P1and P2 end points would result in a carcass with too much backfat. TheP3 endpoint would be below the backfat limit, so the animal can be fedbeyond this point to increase its value.

EXAMPLE Individual Animal Final DTF Calculation

-   1) Input: Sex, Beginning Weight, OFW, Mature Weight, Breed, Hide,    Age, Number of Head, Purchase Date, Hip Height, Calculated Frame    Score, Initial Back Fat, Flesh Condition Code, Ration    Composition/Energy, Environmental Factors.-   2) Run Cornell Calculation Method One→Outputs for 6 periods on feed.    -   Average Weight for Period.    -   Dry Matter Intake for Period.    -   ADG for Period    -   DOF for Period-   3) Calculation Gain for Period=ADG□DOF Period.-   4) Period Feed Cost of Gain=DMI×DOF Period×Cost Per Pound+(Yardage    cost per day×DOF Period÷Gain for Period)-   5) Feed Interest Cost of Gain=Calculated for all except period one-   6) Cattle Interest Cost of Gain for Period I=Daily interest    ratexnumber of days in period=$÷the gain (calculated by average    weight for period less initial weight)-   7) Total nos. 4)+5)+6)=Total incremental Cost of Gain-   8) Calculate and project for all 6 periods and plot projection graph-   9) Plot OFW (Mature Weight) on TCOG line at P-1 at 151 DOF to reach    1006 pounds (28% Body Fat Target).-   10) Plot the location where total incremental COG=Selling Price    ($0.70/lb) on TCOG line at P-2 at 164 DOF to reach 1041 pounds.-   11) Plot Back Fat Deposition Rate-use Initial Back Fat in the DTF2    Method Two calculation to determine the rate. The rate is used to    compound the initial back fat measurement daily for the entire    period and is plotted on the graph as BF.-   12) Plot the 0.6 BF Target on the Fat deposition rate line at P-3    for 0.6 at 123 DOF to reach 920 pounds.-   13) Final DTF Number in this case is P-4, which is the predetermined    maximum Back Fat limit which is selected by the computer program.    This is calculated to be 140 DOF at 975 pounds. The final DTF number    cannot be P-1, P-2 or P-3 because:    -   a) P-1 exceeds Maximum BF to incur a dollar discount.    -   b) P-2 exceeds Maximum BF to incur a dollar discount as well as        causing incremental cost of gain to exceed selling price        resulting in decreased profit.    -   c) P-3 is the original BF target but, since the animal is still        making profit, it should be fed longer.

As soon as the animal exits the processing station 42 to enter thesorting pen area, the computer 78 has calculated the indicatedcharacteristics of the animal, such as projected OFW, projected ADG,projected DTF and a projected feed proration ratio according to theformula and process outlined in FIG. 27. At this point a sort may or maynot be done as indicated at step 3A of the management process. If a sortis to be done, it would likely be a rough sort by animal type, weight,or OED. At this point it would usually be too early to cull animals fromthe feedlot because there is no performance data yet accumulated on anyanimal.

In the illustration of FIG. 7 the measured and processed animals wouldgo directly to step 4 of the process, which is directly to one of fourfeed pens 188, feed pen A, feed pen B, feed pen C or feed pen D. Therethey would be provided a selected feed ration and water for a selectedperiod that may range from 45-75 days but more typically in the 60-75day range. During this first feeding period each animal's records aremaintained and the cost of the feed ration delivered to each pen wouldbe prorated among the individual animals for assessment to theirrespective owners.

At the end of the first feeding period, two or more of the feed pencattle groups in the feed pens A-D are selected for remeasurement at thesame time. This selection may be based on one or more of several factorssuch as the similarity of their group average OED or DTF, breed type,marketing target yields or other factors. Each animal in the selectedgroups is directed back through, for example, the alley 24 from its feedpen through the gates 26, 28 and back through the alley 12 leading tothe single-file chute. Once within the alley 12, the animals are ledinto two different holding sections of the alley as defined by themanually operated alley gates 14, 16, 18 defining holding sections 190,192. Each of the holding sections 190, 192 is capable of holdingapproximately 40 head of cattle. From the holding section 192 the cattleare led through a hydraulically operated crowd gate 18 into the crowdingsection 32 where cattle are directed one-at-a-time through ahydraulically powered one-way gate 20 leading to a single-file entrancesection 44 into the one-way chute 22.

Then the animals are admitted one at a time and single file into thechute 22 where they are measured externally and internally, and weighedonce again. In the processing section 42 the animals may also bereimplanted with a growth hormone as needed. The measurement data foreach animal is automatically entered into the computer 78 via data entrymeans coupled to the measuring apparatus and there correlated with theEID of the animal.

With the historical data, original measurement data and theremeasurement data for each animal, that animal's performance throughthe first feeding period can be accurately calculated and gauged, muchmore so than with the projected performance data from the originalmeasurements alone. Thus, upon remeasurement, each animal's ADG, OFW andDTF (or OED) is recalculated and used as the basis for a prediction offuture performance and a shipping date or at least shipping window,using the methods previously outlined with respect to FIGS. 25 and 26,and Table 1. In addition, each animal's feed proration is recalculatedusing the method and formula outlined in FIGS. 28 a and 28 b. This givesa much more accurate feed proration for each animal than the initialproration determined according to FIG. 27. This new feed proration willbe used to calculate each animal's feed intake for the next feedingperiod. Of course, for the indicated calculations, both the rate ofweight gain (ADG) and the total amount of change (gain) and the fat (fatdeposition rate) and external dimensions (frame, muscular growth) areused in calculating the new projected DTF and OEW for each animal.

At the same time, each animal's DTF as calculated is checked against anydrug withdrawal and safe-to-ship information available from the healthhistory of the animal, also stored in the computer system according tothe system described in the aforementioned U.S. Pat. No. 5,315,505. AnyOED or DTF calculated by the computer or otherwise would be adjusted asdictated by the drug withdrawal and safe-to-ship information from theanimal health system and prior to any assignment of the animal to anyparticular sort group. This drug withdrawal and safe-to-ship check mightbe done either by computer or manually by the operator. Also before anygrowth promotant drug or implant is administered to the animal in theprocessing station, a decision would be made on whether to administer atall based on the calculated DTF or OED, drug cost, and efficacy. Inshort, no growth promotant drug need be given if the animal is predictedto remain in the feedlot for only a short time following aremeasurement.

As each animal leaves the single-file chute, the computer has determinedits sort group and allocated a particular sort pen in which to direct itfrom the chute. Steps 6 and 7 of the diagram of FIG. 7 represent asorting procedure that may be used following a remeasurement.Essentially, each animal is directed to one of the seven sort pens ofFIG. 5 temporarily. Each of the seven sort pens indicated in step 6 willreceive animals selected according to seven different sort groups. Thesort group to which a particular animal is assigned may be based on anyone or more of several parameters but most likely will be based on theirOED or DTF, their visual scores, their weights, their physicalcondition, or a combination thereof.

In the illustration of FIG. 7 there are seven sort groups. These aredesignated, “sort group 1”, “sort group 2”, “flex group”, “earlies”,“lates”, “reruns”, and “trash”. Before th sorting procedure is over instep 6, these seven sort groups will be reduced to four, consisting of“sort group 1”, “sort group 2”, “earlies”, and “lates”. Each of thosefour groups will then be directed, in turn, according to step 8, intoone of the four feed pens A, B, C or D according to their sort groups.Feed pens A-D in all likelihood will be the same feed pens as used instep 4.

To explain the sort groups further, “reruns” are cattle for which one ormore measurements are missing or a process was omitted after a firstpass through the single-file chute. As a result, cattle sorted into sortpen 1 as reruns will be run again through the single-file chute andthere sorted into one of the other six groups, as indicated in step 7.

The “earlies” group consists of cattle that are predicted to haveearlier OED's or DTF's than the rest of the cattle being sorted. Inother words, they are predicted to have shipping dates to the packingplant considerably earlier than the cattle in the other groups. Asindicated, cattle in the earlies group will be directed from sort pen 2in step 6 to feed pen A in step 8. It should be noted that some of thereruns from sort pen 1, after being rerun, may end up in the earliesgroup of sort pen 2 and be eventually directed into feed pen A.

Sort pen 6, consisting of the “lates” group, include cattle that arepredicted to have late shipping dates (DTF's or OED's), as compared tothe other groups. As indicated in the diagram of FIG. 7, the lates groupwill be directed from sort pen 6 to feed pen D. The lates group mayeventually include some of the reruns of sort pen 1 after the reruns arepassed again through the single-file chute.

The “trash” group is composed of non-performing or poorly performingcattle and are sorted into sort pen 7. These are cattle that have poorADG's or other physical problems that render them unsuitable for beefproduction or that are unprofitable to keep in the feedlot. Cattle inthe trash group are culled from the rest of the animals, removed fromthe feedlot and sold as salvage.

The three remaining groups are sort group 1, sort group 2 and the flexgroup. Whatever the parameters being used to sort, the flex groupconsists of animals that are close to the dividing line between sortgroup 1 and sort group 2. For example if sorting is by weight and sortgroup 1 consists of a range of lighter weight animals and sort group 2 arange of heavier weight animals, the flex group consists of animals thatare somewhere in a weight range between the two principal sort groups.

For example, after a first pass through the single-file chute, sortgroup 1 might include 20 animals and sort group 2 might include 17animals. The purpose of the flex group is to even out the number ofanimals in each of sort groups 1 and 2. In the given example, if thereare 10 animals in the flex group, they would be resorted by sending themthrough the single-file chute again and redistributing them into eithersort group 1 or sort group 2 according to weight. As a result of thisresorting process with respect to the flex group, eventually there areno remaining animals in the flex group, as they have all beenredistributed to either sort group 1 or sort group 2. In the givenexample, where sort group 1 originally includes 20 animals, sort group 217 animals and the flex group 10 animals, eventually sort group 1 mayend up with 24 animals, sort group 2 with 23 animals and the flex groupwith none. When the flex group has been redistributed, the animals insort groups 1 and 2 are directed respectively to feed pens B and C.

A further explanation and example of flex sorting follows.

Flex Sorting Description and Examples

Flex sorting is a method of sorting a group of random animals into sortgroups of predetermined size and quantity. The particular measurementthat is used for ordering is of minor importance to the flex sortingmethod, but some examples are current weight, finish date, and finishweight. To achieve this sort, an ordered list of animals is maintainedas the data is collected, a sort group is assigned based on the positionwithin the ordered list. As the sorting starts, insufficient data willexist to make reasonable sort decisions, so animals are placed in a flexgroup until enough data has been collected to be representative of thewhole population. This sample size is expressed as a percent of thetotal population, and is configurable. Other animals that will also beplaced in the flex group are ones that are too close to the splitbetween sort groups to be certain to which group they belong. This areaof uncertainty is defined by flex percent value, it is also configurableand is expressed as a percent of the data range (i.e. maximumvalue−minimum value). At the completion of sorting, the animals in theflex group are processed again, this time since all information is knownabout the population the correct sort decision can be made.

EXAMPLE

Setup parameters:

total population 5 head sort distribution 2 groups first group 2 head(40% of total) second group 3 head (60% of total) sample size 30% flexpercent 10%

Sample weight data 625, 600, 675, 610, 640

1. First weight is 625, add to ordered list, compute new median, and thearea of uncertainty.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 625 1st element 625 N/A

Since the number of weights (1) is less than sample size (1.5=*0.3) putthis weight in flex group.

Results:

Sort Group 1 Sort Group 2 Flex Group 625

2. Next weight is 600, add this weight to the ordered list, compute newmedian, and the area of uncertainty.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 600 ((2 − 1)*0.4) + 1AVG.(1&2) (625 − 600)*0.1 + 625 or between 1&2 or 612.5 or − 2.5

Since the number of weights (2) is greater than the sample size (1.5),check to see if new weight is in the area of uncertainty. The area ofuncertainty is 610 to 615, the new weight is not in this area and isless than the median, so it belongs in sort group one.

Results:

Sort Group 1 Sort Group 2 Flex Group 600 625

3. Next weight is 675, add this weight to the ordered list, compute newmedian, and the area of uncertainty.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 600 ((3 − 1)*0.4) + 1 AVG(1&2) (675 − 600)*0.1 + 625 or between 1&2 or 612.5 or − 7.5

Since the number of weights (3) is greater than the sample size (1.5),check to see if new weight is in the area of uncertainty. The area ofuncertainty is 605 to 620, the new weight is not in this area and isgreater than the median, so it belongs in sort group two.

Results:

Sort Group1 Sort Group 2 Flex Group 600 675 625

4. Next weight is 610, add this weight to the ordered list, computelist, compute new median, and the area of uncertainty.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 600 ((4 − 1)*0.4) + 1 AVG(2&3) (675 − 600)*0.1 + 610 or between 2&3 or 617.5 or − 7.5 625 675

Since the number of weights (4) is greater than the sample size (1.5),check to see if new weight is in the area of uncertainty. The area ofuncertainty is 610 to 625, the new weight is in this area and must beplaced in the flex group.

Results:

Sort Group 1 Sort Group 2 Flex Group 600 675 625 610

5. The last weight is 640, add this weight to the ordered list, computenew median, and the area of uncertainty.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 600 ((5 − 1)*0.4) + 1 AVG(2&3) (675 − 600)*0.1 + 610 or between 2&3 or 617.5 or − 7.5 625 640 675

Since the number of weights (5) is greater than the sample size (1.5),check to see if new weight is in the area of uncertainty. This area ofuncertainty is 610 to 625, the new weight is not in this area and isgreater than the median, so it belongs in sort group two.

Results:

Sort Group 1 Sort Group 2 Flex Group 600 675 625 640 610

6. Now it is time to do the flex pen, the first weight of 625 is alreadyin the ordered list so we only need to determine which group it belongsin.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 600 ((5 − 1)*0.4) + 1 AVG(2&3) None 610 or between 2&3 or 617.5 625 640 675

Since there is no area of uncertainty and the current weight is greaterthan the median, it belongs in group two.

Results:

Sort Group 1 Sort Group 2 Flex Group 600 675 610 640 625

7. Now the last flex weight of 610 is already in the ordered list so weonly need to determine which group it belongs to.

Results:

Ordered List Median Loc Median Wt Uncertainty 600 ((5 − 1)*0.4) + 1AVG(2&3) None 610 or between 2&3 or 617.5 625 640 675

Since there is no area of uncertainty and the current weight is lessthan the median, it belongs in group one.

Results:

Sort Group 1 Sort Group2 Flex Group 600 675 610 640 625

The above example demonstrates a two-way sort, but it can sort anynumber of ways. For an n-way sort there are (n-1) median locationswithin the ordered list to keep track of, but only one flex pen isneeded to hold the animals that we are uncertain about. Also, in theexample given, the sort was done without any errors or animals in thewrong pen. It is possible for the sort to end up with a different headcount in the sort group than expected, or for some head to be in thewrong pen based on their sorting measurement. These mistakes occurmostly at the splits between two sort groups, and involve animals withvery close measurements. One thing that should be pointed out is thatthis sorting method, like a lot of other sorting methods, performsbetter if the data is random. The worst possible scenario is for thedata to already be sorted either ascending or descending.

One additional feature of this sorting method is the ability to have ahuman make subjective sort decisions, such as color, before runningthrough the flex sort, in effect having two flex sort sessions runningconcurrently.

With the animals in feed pens A, B, C and D for the second portion ofthe feeding period as indicated in step 8, they may remain in theirrespective pens until they are ready for shipment. During this secondfeeding period of typically 60-80 days, selected animals or selectedgroups of animals may again be remeasured and resorted through thesingle-file chute and sorting pens if desired or economically feasible.For example the timeline of FIG. 3 indicates two remeasurements andresorts during the feeding period. However FIG. 7 illustrates a singleremeasuring and single uniformity sort more like the procedure outlinedin FIG. 4A. All of the animals in feed pens A-D have new and moreaccurate pro rata feed intake ratios assigned to them using the methodoutlined in FIG. 28 a and FIG. 28 b, including data such as ADG, gain,external and internal measurements and other factors. Individual animalrecords are maintained for each animal during its remaining period oftime in the feedlot. Additional weight checks or other measurements maybe used to monitor actual performance during this second portion of thefeeding period to confirm or modify the OED or DTF of each animal.

Also, as indicated in FIG. 4C, after a certain period within feed pensA-D, one or more of the groups may be sent to pen sorters such as pensorter 94 in FIG. 2 for finish feeding for the time that these groupswill be within their marketing window. This approach allows for“fine-tuning” of the optimum date of shipment for each individual animalbased on market conditions and the individual animal's performance inits final days at the feedlot. This selection process, whetheraccomplished visually, by weight checks or by final feeding in a pensorter, involves the selection process as indicated in step 8A forshipment of the animal to the packing plant. In the case of a pensorter, this would involve sorting the animal selected for shipment fromthe feeding pen portion of the sorter to the shipping pen portion, aspreviously described.

Animals may be selected for shipment based on a selected marketing groupof animals having the same average OED's or DTF's or on an individualanimal basis, depending on how finely tuned the selection processdesired. The selection process may be performed visually, by computer orby repeated weight checks as previously described.

Step 9 of the management system involves shipping the selected animalsto the packing plant 156. At the packing plant, the animals areslaughtered for production of beef products for consumption. At thepacking plant, the EID tag on each live animal is read and transferredby computer to match the identification on the resulting carcass so thatthe carcass data can be matched to the live animal performance andhistory data.

At the packing plant, the EID tags are removed from the animals andshipped in a container to a reconditioning operation where they arecleaned, tested and sorted for delivery back to the proper feedlot. Thecarcass data and the disbursements of funds breakdown for the originalowners of the animals in a marketing group are transmitted to theappropriate feedlot. This data may also be transmitted to the originalcattle producers for use in improving the genetics of the animals forfuture beef production.

The feed proration flow charts of FIGS. 27, 28 a and 28 b have beendiscussed. Following each table is an example calculation using theformulas and flow diagrams set forth in the figures. These examples setforth the data output from the computer when provided with software forcarrying out the calculations set forth in FIGS. 27, 28 a and 28 b. Theexamples are for four animals identified as animals nos. 85, 10, 68 and36. From the examples it will be seen that animal No. 85 had a startingweight of 829 pounds and a calculated optimum finish weight of 1136pounds. During the initial feeding period P1 the ratio of feed allocatedto it was 0.255646, so that out of a total of 780 pounds of feed fedduring the first feeding period, 199.4038866 pounds of feed was proratedto it for allocating feed charges. During the next current period CP,the same ratio was used to prorate a total of 3,000 pounds of feed amongthe four animals, with 767 pounds being allocated to animal No. 85.However from the subsequent calculation, the DMI ratio for animal 85,based on remeasurements and original measurements, changed to 0.253206.As a result, animal 85 in the next feeding period ended up with 1,519pounds of feed prorated to it out of a total of 6,000 pounds. It willalso be noted from the calculations and data output from the computerthat animal No. 85, when remeasured, had a weight of 1,028 pounds, upfrom an 829 pound initial weight. It also ended up with an actual weightof 1,128 pounds at final measurement compared to an original calculatedoptimum finish weight of 1,136 pounds.

When the four animals finally left the feedlot, their DMI numbersoverall were recalculated to adjust their overall DMI ratios, resultingin a reallocation of the total feed fed to each animal. Animal No. 85had 2,440 pounds of feed allocated to it out of a total of 9,660 pounds,based on its recalculated overall feed ratio of 0.25262. The final dataoutput from the feed proration calculations is a ratio of feed to weightgain for each animal. Animal No. 85 ended up with a feed to weight gainratio of 8.17, second highest in the group of four animals considered.

D. The Computer System

FIG. 8 is a general block diagram of the data inputs and data outputs tothe host computer system 78. There are two categories of inputs,including the group input category 194 and the individual animal inputrepresented by interface 196. The individual prior history of eachanimal is entered upon each animal's arrival at the feedlot, asindicated by the prior history input 198. Such prior history wouldinclude each animal's date of birth and its genetic background. Alsoentered at initial processing and on subsequent remeasurements would beeach animal's weight, hip height, backfat and hide condition asindicated at input 200. These measurements are obtained at thesingle-file chute in the manner previously described. These individualinputs in turn are transmitted by cable or radio frequency means to thehost computer 78 for storage and use in calculating the previouslydiscussed formulas. Group information when transmitted to the computerwould include prior history data such as average daily gain while in thepasture and the group condition score, visually estimated at the time ofarrival at the feedlot. Other information would include the sex, age,breed and hide thickness breakdown for the animals in the group. These“cattle factors” are also input into the computer through data entrymeans indicated at 204 and the group input interfaces 194.

Environmental factors such as air temperature, wind, and pen conditionswhere the animals came from are also collected and entered through dataentry means 206 into the group input interface 194.

Management factors for each group including implants, ionophores andprocessing information, are collected and input through data entry means208 into the computer through the group input interfaces 194. Finally,feed factors, such as ration composition, are input through data entrymeans 210 and the group input interfaces 194 into the host computer 78.

Market factors are also part of the data used to calculate the desiredcomputer outputs, such factors including purchase price, cattle futures,basis and premium/discounts for the animals in the group. These marketfactors are entered through data entry means 12 and the group inputinterface 194 into the host computer 78.

With the data collected as described, and the appropriate software, thecomputer system is able to calculate, using formulas such as the onesdisclosed in FIGS. 25, 26, 27, 28 a, 28 b, and Table 1, such outputs asa projected date to finish (DTF), optimum end weight (OEW), andprojected end points such as finish weight, hot carcass weight, yieldgrade, and USDA quality grade. The computer system also calculates areturn on investment including cost, incomes and profit as indicated at218.

Examples of the type of data collected, calculated, stored and availablein reports generated by the computer system are shown in Tables 3A-3G.

Table 3A, the cattle received report by load, has already beendiscussed. It discloses the information available from the producer andentered into the computer through appropriate data entry means upon thearrival of a load of cattle at the feedlot. This is a “group” report andis the sort of information entered into the computer as indicated atdata entry means 202, 204 and 206 of FIG. 8.

Table 3B is a pen assignment summary report, which is another group typereport and gives the sorting pen assignments 1-7 for lot No. 495 ofcattle that is to be fed in pens 59, 57 and 58. The number of head ofcattle in each pen 10, 11 and 11 for sorting pens 1, 2 and 4 and feedpens 59, 57 and 58 is given. This information is available from thecomputer after at least one measurement and sort of a lot of animals.

Still referring to Table 3B, the remaining data in the pen assignmentsummary report should be self-explanatory, giving information concerningthe projected finish weight, the current weight, the frame size andcurrent backfat measurements, on average, for the animals in feed pens59, 57 and 58. In addition to the averages for each of the indicatedmeasurements, the pen assignment summary report also gives maximum andminimum ranges for the animals in each sort group.

Table 3C is a sample of a pen assignment detail report generated by thecomputer system. This report indicates the lot number, the feed pennumber, the sort pen number, and the EID tag number of each of the 11animals in feed pen 57. The report also indicates that the animals inthis feed pen have a shipping window ranging from May 14, 1994 to Sep.28, 1994, indicating that the animals in this group are expected toreach their optimum condition, such as optimum finish weight, sometimewithin this window. The pen assignment detail report also givesindividual animal measurements and calculations including video imagedimensions (VID), and projected days to finish (DTF) which is the numberof days the animal is projected to require to reach its optimum finishweight. Also indicated is the projected optimum finish weight (OFW), theanimal's current weight (CWT), and each animal's average daily gain(ADG). Finally, the pen assignment detail report gives each animal'sframe measurement score (FM) and backfat measurement (BF).

Because of the amount of information available for each animal in eachfeed pen in the feedlot, and at any time during the animal's stay in thefeedlot, it will be readily appreciated how animals can be selected, onan individual basis if desired, for shipment to the packing plant wheneach animal is in optimum condition for shipment. Simply by takingrepeated measurements of each animal as it nears its projected shippingdate or optimum finish weight, animals can be selected for shipment andslaughter based on their individual performances and market factorsrather than the performances of any particular group, if desired.

Table 3D and Table 3E are marketing yard sheets that the computer systemcan generate for each animal in the feedlot. The marketing yard sheet ofTable 3D is for the same group of animals as the marketing yard sheet ofTable 3E. However the yard sheet of Table 3D gives individual animaldata for lot No. 495 of animals on the measurement date of Mar. 30,1994, while Table 3E gives the data for the same animals in lot No. 495approximately three weeks later, on Apr. 22, 1994.

As will be seen by the columns in the marketing yard sheets, each animalis identified by tag number, pen number and lot number. Additional dataavailable in the other columns of both marketing yard sheets includevarious projections that have been calculated for each animal, acomparison of purchase weight and current weight for each animal, dayson feed (DOF) information for each animal, the ration information thatapplies to each animal, average daily gain (ADG) information for eachanimal and feed intake information for each animal. Finally, theprojected and actual cost information based on various treatments,processing and other factors for each animal is listed.

Table 3F is a sample of a pen closeout report generated by the computersystem as a result of the various inputs, including measurement inputsfor each animal and each group of animals. This gives the income andexpense information for a pen of animals, broken down to an average costper head, including feed charges, cattle insurance, yardage fees andprocessing fees. Other pen information included in the pen closeoutreport includes such information as total pounds gained by all animalsin the pen, broken down to an average gain per head. Also included areaverage daily gain for each animal, daily feed costs per head, dailytotal costs per head, total pounds of feed fed for the pen and totalpounds per head. Also included is average daily consumption data. Otherinformation includes the cost of the feed fed.

In the summary at the bottom of the pen closeout report, the profit orloss from the pen is given. In the sample, there was no profit for theindicated pen, which included 10 heifers. Based on the summary, the 10heifers in the pen had an average incoming weight of 678 pounds and anaverage outgoing weight of 787 pounds. Each gained an average of 3.21pounds per day for a total of 34 days on feed. The cost of the gain was$56.21.

The final sample report is shown in Table 3G which is a Closeout SummaryBy Lot report. In this case the lot number is 42894, which was includedin pen 553, containing a total of 27 head. The total profit for the lotwas $4,957.98. Each animal in the report is identified by its visualidentification tag number (VID) and the profit from each animal iscalculated. In addition, each animal's performance during its stay inthe feedlot is calculated. Each animal is listed under its sire and dam.This sort of information is valuable to the cattle producer indetermining which sires and dams produce the most profitable offspring.This information is then used in making future breeding decisions.

A layout of the computer system used in a prototype of the presentinvention is shown in FIG. 6. Several different computers are used inthe system. First there is a feedlot business systems (FBS) computer 230located at the feedlot office 232. This computer stores the databasesused in the system and performs most of the calculations needed inoperating the system.

Remote from the FBS computer and closer to the chute area 22 are aseparate process control computer 234 and an ultrasound computer 236within a common control cabinet 238. Separate from the control cabinetand the other computers is a video computer 240.

Basically, the process control computer 234 controls the operation ofall subsystems including the stall and sorting gates, weigh scale,ultrasound computer and the video computer. The process control computercommunicates with the FBS computer through the modems 241, 242, line 244and FBS interface 246. The ultrasound computer 236 communicates with theprocess control computer 234 through a line 248. The ultrasound computer240 also has an output line 250 to a backfat monitor 252 and an inputline 254 from the ultrasound backfat scanner 256 at the single-filechute stall 40.

The video computer 240 communicates with the process control computer234 through a commline 258. It also has an output line 260 to a videomonitor 262, and input lines 264, 266 to video cameras, including anoverhead camera 268 and a side-view camera 270.

Each animal is weighed by a scale loadcell 272 at the weigh stall 38.The loadcell communicates with the scale 274 through a line 276. Thescale in turn communicates with the process control computer through aline 278 and data split 280. Data from the data split also can becommunicated via line 282 and a modem 284 and line 286 directly to theFBS computer 230 through the FBS interface 246.

Data concerning drugs, other animal health treatments and otherinformation about an individual animal at the processing station orstall 42 can be entered into an animal health computer or monitor 288 atthe processing station and from there communicated directly through themodem 290 and line 292 and interface 246 to the FBS computer.

As previously noted, each animal has an EID tag applied to it in thesingle-file chute to give each animal a unique electronicidentification. This identification is transmitted from the EID tag by aprobe antenna 294 at the EID/USBF stall 40 through a line 296 from thechute to a tiris relay 298 and from the relay through a line 300 to atiris EID reader 302. The tiris reader 302 transmits the animal's EIDidentification through a line 304 to the process control computer 234.Alternatively, each animal's EID tag signal can be received by a hangingantenna 306 at the single-file chute and transmitted via line 308 to thetiris relay 298 and thence through line 300 to the tiris reader 302 andthrough the line 304 to the process control computer 234.

The FBS computer not only collects data and uses it to calculateprojections, costs and other information used in the management methodand system, it also collects data from other sources not shown. Forexample, the FBS computer performs the regular feedlot accountingfunctions and generates financial reports. It may also receive and storedata from a computerized animal drug inventory control and animal healthhistory and drug treatment system as disclosed in the previouslymentioned U.S. Pat. No. 5,315,505. The FBS computer may also collect andstore data from a computerized feed additive delivery system such asdisclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,733,971 and the related patents previouslymentioned. The FBS computer may also receive and store data concerningthe amount of feed ration delivered to each of the feed pens in afeedlot, including such data collected from a computerized bunk readersystem such as disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 5,008,821. All suchinformation, including the drug usage information, feed ration usageinformation, and feed additive usage information can be used togetherwith the data concerning each animal collected from the system of thepresent invention and other data that may be collected and stored in theFBS computer database to prorate feed ration and feed additive costs toindividual animals and thereby calculate the cost of production valueand other pertinent information about each animal in the feedlotaccording to various formulas, a few of which are disclosed as examplesand discussed.

Tables 4A□4E are sample pages of prompts that are generated by thecomputer programs that are used in the computer system 78 that operatesthe described system. The described management system is known as theelectronic cattle management system (ECM) which is the computer symbolused to initiate the program. The ECM program includes four sessiontypes, one of which is entered to begin the system's operation. In Table4B it will be seen that certain animal measurements can be keyed in,automatically entered or not recorded.

Item 7 in Table 4B gives the prompts for entering the type of sortingthat is desired such as, for example, a flex sort as previouslydescribed.

At the top of Table 4C, the prompts for entering the number of animalsto be sorted into the various sort pens are indicated.

Table 4D lists the various prompts for processing each animal at thesingle-file chute. By entering the proper prompt, the computer can beinstructed to process the identified animal in a particular way such asby weight, by reading its EID, by ultrasound measurement of backfatand/or by taking external video measurements.

Additional prompts for setting the parameters for measuring and sortingare given in Table 4E and 4F.

E. Computer Programs

The method and system of the present invention use a number of differentcomputer programs to run the system as described, the operation andsequencing of which are all controlled by the previously describedprocess control computer 234 shown in FIG. 6. These programs will now bedescribed with reference to their respective flow charts.

First, control of the operation of the entrance and exit gates at thevarious stalls or stations in the single file chute will be described.First with reference to FIG. 9A, the get-ready station 34 in thesingle-file chute includes the entrance or tail gate 46 and the exit orhead gate 48 defining the stall. Within the stall are three sensorsincluding a tail sensor 342, a fill sensor 344 and a head sensor 346.These sensors, which may be photoelectric sensors or some otherautomatic sensors, detect the presence of an animal within the stallspace, and when all three sensors detect the presence of an animal, theanimal will be contained within the space, whereupon the tail gate 46can be closed after being opened initially to allow entrance of theanimal into the stall space. FIG. 9A also indicates the direction oftravel of the animal through the single-file chute and the stall spaceas indicated by the arrow 316.

Referring now to FIG. 9B, the computer program for controlling theoperation of the tail and head gates 46, 48 is disclosed. This computerprogram resides in the process control computer 234 of FIG. 6. Althoughnot shown, obviously the sensors associated with the get ready stall andall other stations in the single-file chute and the sort pens, to bedescribed, are in communication with the process control computer.

First the program is conditioned by another program to be described toget ready to receive the next animal that will proceed through thesingle file chute, as indicated at step 318. At this point, if the fillsensor is off as indicated at 320, the program assumes that the getready stall is empty and so commands that the head gate be closed asindicated at step 322. Then the program commands opening of the tailgate 324 to allow the next animal to enter the get ready stall. Afterthe tail gate opens, the program waits until the fill sensor at 326detects the presence of an animal in the stall. The program thenproceeds to the next step to detect when the tail sensor is turned off,at step 328. When this occurs, the program commands closing of the tailgate at step 330. If at step 326 the fill sensor does not detect thepresence of an animal, the tail gate will not close. Also, as indicatedat 328, if the tail sensor remains on, the tail gate will not close.Only when the fill sensor is on and the tail sensor is off can the tailgate close.

After the tail gate closes, the program inquires at step 322 whether thenext station, namely the video station 86, is ready for the next animal.At this point nothing happens until the processing computer receives anindication that the video station is ready for the next animal. Whenthis occurs, the program, as step 334, signals the video computer 240 toget ready for the next animal. At this point the head gate 48 is openedas indicated at 336. The program then inquires at step 338 as to whetherthe fill sensor 312 in the get ready stall is off and at step 340whether the head sensor is off. When both the fill sensor 312 and thehead sensor 314 are off, indicating that an animal has left the getready stall and entered the video stall, the program commands the headgate 48 to reclose as indicated at step 322, and then commands the tailgate at step 324 to reopen to ready the stall for the next animal.

Referring to FIG. 10A, after the animal leaves the get ready stall 34 itwalks through the video stall 36 where it is scanned for externaldimensions, and proceeds, without stopping, through the open tail gate50 directly into the HD/scale stall 38 where the animal is weighed andan EID tag is applied to the animal if necessary and read to identifyit. Because of the continuous movement of the animal through the videostall, there are no tail, fill or head sensors in that stall. Howeverthe subsequent EID/scale stall requires the animal to stop while it isweighed. Thus, both the tail gate 50 and the head gate 52 must be closedwhile the animal is contained within the EID/scale stall, identified andweighed. Thus such stall includes a tail sensor 342, a fill sensor 344and a head sensor 346, all of which communicate with the process controlcomputer. Again, the direction of travel of the animal is indicated bythe arrow 316.

Referring to FIG. 10B, the computer program for operating the tail gate50 and head gate 52 at the EID/scale station is disclosed. As an animalproceeds through the video stall 36, tail gate 50 will be open if theEID/scale station is ready for the next animal, which will be determinedby whether or not the head gate of such station is closed and its fillsensor and head sensors 344, 346 are off. At this point, the EID/scalestation computer program 348 is initialized and ready to start itssequence of operation. First, at step 350, the program inquires whetherthe fill sensor 344 is off. If so, it commands the head gate 52 to closeat step 352. Thereafter, at step 354 the tail gate 50 is commanded toopen, allowing the next animal to enter the EID/scale stall. Next theprogram, at step 356, inquires whether the fill sensor is on. If so, itinquires at step 358 whether the tail sensor is off. If so, at step 360,the program commands the tail gate 50 to reclose, whereupon the animalis ready to be weighed and have its EID tag attached if necessary, andread.

With the animal in the EID/scale stall, the program inquires at step 362whether an EID identification of the animal is required. If so, theprocess control computer 234 is commanded to attempt to read the tirisEID reader 302 at step 364. If no EID is required, the program nextinquires whether a weight is required at step 366. If so, the processcontrol computer at step 368 is commanded to read the animal's weightfrom the scale 274. After this, or if no weight is required, the programwill inquire at step 370 whether a hip-height measurement of the animalis required. If so, the process control computer is commanded at step372 to read and record the video measurements communicated from thevideo computer 240. After the measurements are recorded, if required,the program inquires at step 374 whether measurements are complete. Ifnot, the program will return to step 362 and again proceed through theprogram to attempt to read the video measurements. Once the measurementshave been recorded, the program proceeds at step 376 to inquire whetherthe next station, namely the ultrasound station 40, is ready for thenext animal. Unless the next station is ready for the animal, the headgate 52 will not open. When the next station signals that it is ready,through the process control computer, the head gate 52 is commanded toopen at step 378. Next, the program inquires whether the fill sensor 344is off, at step 380. If not, the program will not proceed to the nextstep and reclose the head gate. When the fill sensor is off, the programinquires whether the head sensor is off If the head sensor is off,indicating that the animal has left the EID/scale stall, the programcommands the process control computer to reclose the head gate 52. Atthis point the weighed and identified animal will have entered theultrasound stall 40, and the program returns to step 352 to commandreclosing the head gate in preparation for the next animal.

Referring to FIG. 9A, the ultrasound station 40 is disclosed as having atail sensor 384, a fill sensor 386 and a head sensor 388. It alsoincludes the tail gate 52, which is the same gate 52 that serves as thehead gate for the preceding EID/scale stall 38. It also includes thehead gate 54 which serves as the tail gate for the next processing stall42. Again, the direction of travel of the animal through the ultrasoundstation and through the single-file chute is indicated by the arrow 316.

Referring now to FIG. 11B, the computer program for controlling theoperation of the gates and thus the animal within the ultrasound stationis indicated at 390. Once initiated, it first inquires at step 392whether the fill sensor 386 is off. If not, because the preceding animalhas not yet left the station, the program will return to determinewhether the animal has not yet completed its ultrasound scan. However,assuming that the preceding animal has left the ultrasound station andthe head gate 54 is closed, the program commands at step 394 that thehead gate be cracked open. Then at step 396 the program commands theprocessing computer to open the tail gate. When the tail gate is opened,the program inquires whether the fill sensor is on, at step 398. If so,indicating that the next animal has entered the ultrasound station, theprogram inquires whether the tail sensor is off, at step 400. When thetail sensor goes off, the computer program instructs the computer toclose the tail gate, at step 402, whereupon the next animal is fullywithin the ultrasound station and ready to be prepared for measurement.Once the tail gate is closed, the program inquires at step 404 whetherthe head catcher is to be employed to stabilize the animal in thestation. If it is, the program inquires whether the head sensor is on atstep 406. If it is, the program, at step 408, commands closing of thehead gate.

Once the head gate is closed, the program at step 410 inquires whetherthe animal is to be “squeezed” within the station. This has reference tothe device at the station commonly referred to as a “squeeze gate”,which in effect squeezes the animal from behind into tight confinementwithin the stall so that it cannot move to any appreciable extent. Ifthe answer is yes, the squeeze gate at 412 is commanded to close at step412. If the answer is no, the squeeze gate is not actuated. In eithercase, the next programming sequence is an inquiry as to whether theanimal's backfat is to be measured, at step 414. If the answer is yes,the program will attempt to take a reading from the ultrasound computerat step 416 to record the backfat measurement. If the answer is no, theprogram inquires whether all measurements are completed at step 418.This is also the next step after a backfat ultrasound reading isattempted at step 416. If the answer is no, the program will againattempt to take a backfat measurement. If the answer is yes, the programinquires whether the next station in the chute is ready for the animal,at step 420. If not, nothing further happens until the next station isready for the animal. When that occurs, the head gate 54 is commanded toopen at step 422. When the head gate is open, the program inquires atstep 426 whether the fill sensor is off. If not, nothing further happensuntil the fill sensor is off. When that occurs, the program inquires atstep 426 whether the head sensor is off. If not, nothing further happensuntil the head sensor is off. When that occurs, the program returns tostep 394 to cause the head gate to crack, ready for the next animal.

Referring to FIG. 12A, the animal proceeds from the ultrasound station40 into the processing station 42 through the head gate 54 of theultrasound station, which becomes the tail gate 54 of the processingstation. Within the processing station are three sensors, a tail sensor428, a fill sensor 430 and a head sensor 432.

Referring to FIG. 12B, the computer program for the processing station,indicated at 434, first inquires whether the fill sensor 430 is off, atstep 436. If not, the head gate 56 will not close until the fill sensordoes indicate that the preceding animal has left the processing station.When the fill sensor is off, head gate 56 is commanded to close at step438 and the tail gate 54 is commanded to open at step 440 to admit thenext animal into the processing station.

Next, the program inquires whether the fill sensor is on at step 442. Ifnot, nothing further happens until the fill sensor is on. When thatoccurs, the program inquires whether the tail sensor 428 is off, at step444. If the tail sensor is not off, the tail gate 54 will not close.When the tail sensor is off, indicating that the animal is completelywithin the processing station, the tail gate 54 is commanded to close atstep 446. When the tail gate is closed the program, at step 448,inquires whether there is to be a head catch. If the answer is yes, theprogram inquires at step 450 whether the head sensor 432 is on. If not,nothing further happens until the head sensor is on. If the answer isyes, the head gate 56 is closed at 452 to catch the animal's head.

Next, the program inquires whether the animal is to be squeezed by thesqueeze gate within the processing station, at step 454. If not, theprogram proceeds to the next processing sequence. If the answer is yes,the squeeze gate at the processing station is commanded to close at step456 to confine the animal within the station. After the squeeze gate isclosed, the program proceeds to the next processing sequence.

The next inquiry, at step 458, is whether the animal needs to beidentified by its EID. If the answer is yes, the program instructs theprocess control computer at step 460 to attempt to read anidentification from the tiris. Nothing further happens until the animalis identified. When the animal has been identified or if noidentification is needed, the program inquires whether a sort pen forthe animal is required, at step 462. If not, a status light on a controlpanel (not shown) at the processing station is commanded to indicate, atstep 464, that the animal is ready to be released from the single-filechute.

If a sort pen is required, the program at step 466 inquires whether theanimal data has been sent to the FBS computer. If the answer is no, thedata is sent to the FBS computer, at step 468. If the animal data hasalready been sent to the FBS computer, the program bypasses step 468 andattempts to read the correct sort pen for the animal as determined bythe FBS computer at step 470. The program then returns to the sort penrequired inquiry step 462. If a sort pen is still required then the justdescribed steps are repeated. If a sort pen identity is not required,then the program proceeds on through the sequence and the ready torelease status light is illuminated on the aforementioned control panel.

Thereafter, an operator must manually press a release button to releasean animal from the single-file chute into the alley between the sortpens. At this point the computer inquires whether the release button hasbeen pushed, at step 472. If the answer is no, nothing further happensuntil the release button is pushed. When the release button has beenpushed, the program inquires whether the sort pen is ready, at step 474.If not, nothing further happens until either the release button ispushed or the sort pen is ready. When the sort pen is ready, head gate56 is commanded to open, at step 476. When the head gate is open, theprogram inquires whether the fill sensor is off, at step 478. If not,nothing further happens until the fill sensor is off. When it is off,the program next inquires whether the head sensor is off, at step 480.If not, nothing further happens until the head sensor is off. When it isoff, the program returns to step 438 to close the head gate and preparethe stall for the next animal.

Referring now to FIG. 13A, the seven sort pens 62 and their respectivesorting pen entrance gates 62 are illustrated schematically. Thedirection of travel of the animals through the alley 60 between the tworows of sorting pens is indicated by the arrow 316 as they leave thesingle-file chute indicated generally at 22.

FIG. 13B is a flow diagram of the computer program 482 for operating thesort pen entrance gates 62. The first step in the programming sequenceis to make sure all sort pen gates are closed at step 484. Next, theprogram at step 486 inquires of the process control computer whether asort pen is requested. If not, nothing further happens and the sort pengates remain closed, and each animal would travel through the alley 60to an appropriate feed pen through the open gate 62 of feed pen 7 asindicated in FIG. 13A.

If a sort pen is requested, the designated sort pen is commanded to openat 488. When the sort pen gate is open the program inquires whether thesort pen gate sensor (not shown) has been tripped, at step 490. When thesort pen gate sensor is tripped, it would indicate that an animal hasentered the sort pen through the open gate. The sort pen sensor, such asa photocell, would be located at the gate entrance so that its beamwould be interrupted when an animal passes through the entrance into thepen with the gate open. After the sort pen sensor has been tripped,there is a five second delay, indicated at step 492, to give the animaltime to pass through the open gate into the designated pen. Thereafter,the entrance gate is commanded to close again, as indicated at step 494.When the designated sort pen gate is closed, the program returns to step486 to inquire if a sort pen is requested for the next animal. Nothingfurther happens until a sort pen is again requested.

FIG. 14 is a flow diagram for the computer program in the processcontrol computer that operates in conjunction with the measuring andprocessing station and sort pen operating programs to control thesequence of operation of the various station head and tail gates andsort pen entrance gates. The FIG. 14 program, indicated generally at496, is for controlling the movement of a single animal through thesingle-file chute and its measuring and processing stations and into oneof the selected sort pens. The processing sequence program 496 starts atstep 498 by closing the GR1 stall head gate and opening the GR1 stalltail gate. Then at step 500 it asks whether there is an animal in theGR1 stall. If not, nothing further happens until an animal enters theGR1 stall.

When there is an animal in the stall as indicated by the fill and tailsensors in the stall, the GR1 tail gate is closed at step 502. Then theprogram asks if the video and scale/EID stations are ready for ananimal, at step 504. If not, nothing further happens until those stallsare empty and ready for the next animal. When they are, the GR1 headgate opens at 506. Then, at step 508, when the sensors in the GR1 stallindicate that the stall is empty, the GR1 head gate closes at step 510.As the animal passes from the GR1 stall through the video stall thevideo measurements are made under control of the video computer, asindicated at step 512.

The animal passes from the video stall into the scale/EID station orstall as indicated at step 514. When the sensors in the scale/EIDstation indicate that an animal is in the station, the scale/EID tailgate is closed at step 516. Thereafter, the animal is weighed in thescale/EID station as indicated at 518. Next, there is an attempt to readthe animal's EID identification at step 520. Thereafter, the programinquires whether the ultrasound station is ready for the animal at step522. If not, nothing further happens until the ultrasound station isready. When ready, the head gate of the scale/EID station is opened atstep 524 so the animal can pass into the ultrasound station. Next, theprogram asks at step 526 whether the animal is gone from the scale/EIDstation. If not, nothing further happens until the program is told thatthe animal has left the station. When the animal is gone from thescale/EID station the scale/EID head gate is closed at step 528.

Next, the program asks at step 530 whether there is an animal in theultrasound station. If not, nothing further happens until an animal isdetected in the ultrasound station. Then the ultrasound tail gate isclosed at step 532. Thereafter, the ultrasound computer operates theultrasound machine to make the backfat measurements at step 534, and theprocess control computer is commanded to read the video measurements atstep 536 by the processing station program.

Next, the processing station program asks whether the processing stationis ready for the animal, at step 538. If not, nothing further happensuntil the processing station has cleared the previous animal and isready for the next animal. Then, the ultrasound head gate is opened atstep 540, allowing the animal to proceed into the processing station.Thereafter, the program asks whether the animal is gone from theultrasound station, as indicated at step 542. If not, nothing furtherhappens until the animal has cleared the ultrasound station. Thereafter,the ultrasound station head gate is closed at step 544.

Next, the program asks whether the animal has entered the processingstation at step 544. If not, nothing further happens until the animal isfully within the processing station, after which the processing stationtail gate is closed at step 546. After the animal is within theprocessing station, its EID identification is read at step 548, itsmeasurement data from the previous measuring stations is transmitted tothe FBS computer at step 550, and the FBS computer transmits to theprocess control computer the assigned sort pen for the animal at step552.

At this point, within the processing station, the animal may beimplanted with growth promotants or undergo additional treatment thatmay be indicated. When this processing is completed, a button ismanually pushed by an operator to indicate that the animal is ready toleave the processing station. The computer program then asks whether therelease button has been pushed at step 554 and if not, nothing furtherhappens and the animal cannot leave the processing station. When therelease button has been pushed, the program inquires whether theassigned sort pen is ready for the animal, at step 556. Until thedesignated sort pen is ready, nothing further happens and the animalremains in the processing station. When the sort pen is ready, theprocessing station head gate is opened at step 558 and the specifiedsort pen gate is also opened at step 560, so the animal can leave theprocessing station and proceed into the sort gate alley and into theopen sort pen.

Next, the computer program asks whether the animal has left theprocessing station at step 562. If so, the head gate of the processingstation is closed at step 564. Next, the program asks whether the sortpen sensor has been tripped by the animal entering through the sort pengate, at step 566. If so, the designated sort pen gate is closed at step568. Finally, the identification of the animal entering the sort pen isrecorded at step 570 and the processing sequence program ends for thatparticular animal at step 572.

FIG. 15 is the overall ECM process control program in the processcontrol computer that controls identification and shutdown of thevarious equipment used in the system including the sort pen gatesensors, the measuring and processing station sensors, the station gateactuators, the tiris EID reader, the ultrasound computer, the videomeasurement computer, the FBS computer interface and the like. Theprogram is indicated generally at 574.

First, the particular configuration of the feedlot management systembeing used is loaded into the computer at step 576, and thereafter thevarious computers, interfaces, actuators, sensors, sort pen gates, andthe like are initialized at step 578. Next, the various parameters to beused in the system are entered at step 580 through a data entry means.Next, the program checks for user inputs at step 582, and inquireswhether any stopping of the operation of the system has been requestedat step 584. If a stop has been requested, the system waits for thegates to settle at step 586 and then shuts down the equipment under itscontrol at step 588 to end the ECM process control program at step 590.

If no stop of the system has been requested, then the program updatesthe sensors at step 592, updates the gates at 594 and updates themeasurement and processing stations at step 596. Thereafter, the programreturns to the portion of the program at step 582 that checks for userinputs and the program then continues to operate for the next animalproceeding through the system.

FIG. 16 is the station initialization program 598 that conditions eachmeasuring and processing station for the receipt of the next animal.Each station is initialized at step 600, and when completed for allstations, the station initialization program ends at step 602. Toinitialize each station or pen, the program inquires whether the fillsensor in that station is on, at step 604. If the fill sensor is on, theprogram inquires whether this is a sort pen at step 606. If not, theprogram then assumes that the head gate is closed and that the tail gateis closed for that particular station at step 608, and then the programreturns to its start at step 600 and repeats the sequence for each of(n) stations or pens. If at any station the program detects that a fillsensor is not on, at step 604 the program proceeds to a station setupstep 610 and then back to the start of the programming sequence at step600. If at step 606 of the programming sequence the program detects thatthis is a sort pen being initialized, then the program proceeds to thestation setup step 610 before proceeding back to the start of theprogramming sequence at step 600.

FIG. 17 is the flow chart for the “update stations” program 612. Thefirst step in the program sequence is to update each station for thenext animal as indicated at step 614. When each station of the totalnumber of stations (n) has been updated, the update program for thatstation ends at step 616. The program resequences until all stationshave been updated.

To update a station, the next step 616 of the program asks a stationwhether it is waiting for an animal. If it is, then it initiates thecapture animal program at step 618, which will be describedsubsequently. After the capture animal program for a particular stationhas been run, the program sequences back to its start at step 614 andthen proceeds to update the next station. If a particular station atsequencing step 616 of the program is not waiting for an animal, theprogram then asks whether an animal has been captured at step 620. If ananimal has not been captured, it then asks at step 622 whether an animalhas been released from the station. If an animal has been released, theprogram resequences to the beginning at step 614 to rerun the programfor the next station. If for a particular station an animal is capturedwhen the inquiry is made at step 620, the program next asks at step 624whether the measurements are complete at that station. If themeasurements are not complete, the program waits until the measurementsare made at step 626.

Next, the program asks if the measurements have been completed at step628 and if the answer is yes a light on the control panel is turned onat step 630 to indicate that the measurements are complete, and theprogram sequences back to the beginning at step 614. If the measurementsare not complete, the program sequences back to the beginning and rerunsuntil the measurements are complete and the “complete light” can beturned on.

If, at step 624 when the program inquires whether the measurements arecomplete and the answer is yes, the program then asks at step 632whether the animal is ready for release. If the answer is no, theprogram sequences to the beginning and reruns through the sequencesuntil the animal is ready for release. When the animal is ready forrelease at step 632 of the program, it then asks at step 634 whether therelease button has been pushed. If it has, then the animal is releasedat step 636. If it has not, then the program sequences back to thebeginning to rerun until the animal is released. If at step 622 of theprogram an animal has not been released, then the program commands thatthe animal be released at step 638 after which the program sequencesback to the beginning to update the station for the next animal.

FIG. 18 shows the flow chart for the “station setup” computer program640. In the first step of the programming sequence the program askswhether this is a sort pen. If it is a sort pen, the sort pen entrancegate (indicated in the flow chart as the “tail gate” at step 644 isclosed to end the station setup program for the sort pen.

If the station setup program is not being run for a sort pen, then theprogram commands that the squeeze gate, if any, be opened at 646. Next,the program inquires at step 648 whether the station has a crack sensor.If it does, then the program commands that the head gate be cracked atstep 650. Then the program commands that the tail gate be opened at step652 to end the setup program for that particular station.

If at the sequencing step 648 the station does not have a crack sensor,then the program commands that the station head gate be closed at step654 and then that the tail gate be opened at step 652 to end the stationsetup program, at which point the station is ready to receive the nextanimal.

FIG. 19 is the flow chart for the “capture animal” program for eachstation, which, like the preceding programs, is run by the processcontrol computer. The program, indicated at 656, first inquires whetherthe tail gate for a station is open at step 658. If the tail gate is notopen, it inquires whether the fill sensor at the station is on at step660. If the fill sensor is not on the program sequences to a point whereit asks whether the head and tail gates are closed at step 662. If thehead and tail gates are not closed, the program sequences to its end atstep 664 because there is no animal present to be captured.

Returning to step 660 of the programming sequence, if the fill sensor ison, the program then inquires whether the tail sensor is on at step 666.If the tail sensor is on the program then sequences to step 662 toinquire whether the head and tail gates are closed. If the head and tailgates are closed, the programs inquires whether this is a sort pen atstep 668. If it is not a sort pen, the program commands that the statuslight on the control panel be turned on to indicate that the measuringor processing at the station is not complete, at step 670. If at step668 it is a sort pen, then the program commands that the animal'sidentity be recorded at step 672.

Returning to step 666, if the tail sensor is not on but the fill sensoris on, then the program commands that the tail gate be closed at step674. Once the tail gate is closed, the program at step 676 inquireswhether there is a head catcher at the station and if so whether thehead is to be caught by it.

If the station has no head catcher, then the program at step 678inquires whether the head sensor is off. If it is not off, nothingfurther happens until it does go off. Then the program commands the headgate to close at step 680. When the head gate closes the programinquires whether the station has a squeeze gate and if so whether theanimal is to be squeezed, at step 682. If the animal is to be squeezed,the squeeze gate is commanded to close at step 684. After the squeezegate is closed, the program sequences through the steps previouslydescribed at 662, 668, and 672 to the end of the capture program at 664.

If at step 676 there is an indication that there is a head catcher to beoperated, the program inquires at step 686 whether the head sensor ison. If it is on then the head gate is commanded to close at step 688,and the program sequences through steps 682, 684, 662, 668 and 672 aspreviously described.

If at step 686, the head sensor is not on, then the program sequences tostep 662 to inquire whether the head and tail gates are closed.

The next program to be described is the “make measurements program, theflow diagram for which is shown in FIGS. 20A-B and indicated generallyat 690. This is the program of the process control computer thatcontrols the operation of the computers that control the equipment formaking the three basic measurements, namely a weight measurement, anexternal measurement via the video scanner, and an ultrasoundmeasurement for backfat via the ultrasound machine. The program alsocontrols the reading of the measurement data and its transmission to theFBS computer.

The first step 692 in the program is to inquire whether an animal needsto be identified through its ED tag, by asking whether there is a tirisreader. If there is a tiris reader the program inquires whether anelectronic ID of the animal is still needed at step 694. If anelectronic identification is needed, the program inquires whether anidentity reading is ready at step 696. If the reading is ready, theprogram instructs the computer to read the animal's electronicidentification at step 698. If at any step in the foregoing sequence, itis indicated that no electronic ID is needed or that the reading is notready, the program proceeds to the next sequence of steps.

The sequence involves weighing, and the first step in the sequence is toinquire whether there is a scale at the station. If there is a scale atthe station, the program inquires at step 708 whether a weight isrequired. If a weight is required the program asks if the scale readingis available at step 710. If the scale reading is available, the programinstructs the computer to read the scale weight at step 712. If at anypoint in the foregoing weigh sequence it is indicated that a weight isnot required or a weight reading is not available, the program sequencesto the next series of steps for backfat measurement. The backfat stepsstart with an inquiry at step 708 whether there is an ultrasound machineat the station. If there is, the program inquires whether a backfatmeasurement is required at step 710. If a backfat measurement isrequired, the program commands the appropriate computer to read theultrasound data at step 712. If a backfat measurement is not availableor needed, or once the ultrasound data has been read, the programsequences to the next series of steps relating to video measurements.

The first inquiry at the next sequence of steps as indicated at step 714is whether there is a video measurement interface at the particularstation. If there is, the program inquires whether a hip-heightmeasurement is still required at step 716. If it is, the programinquires whether the video measurements are ready to be read at step718. If they are, a reading of the video measurements of the animal ismade at step 720, and the program sequences to the next series of stepsbeginning at step 722. If at any point in the video measurement sequenceof steps it is indicated that a measurement is not required or that thevideo measurements are not available to be read, the program sequencesto the next series of steps.

At step 722 the program inquires whether there is an FBS computerinterface at the station. If there is, the program inquires whether asort pen is required at step 724. If one is required, the programinquires whether all measurements are completed at step 726. If allmeasurements are completed, then the program transmits the recordedmeasurement data to the FBS computer. It also requests the FBS computerto assign a sort pen to the animal at step 728. If at any point in theforegoing sequence of steps, beginning at step 722, there is no sort penrequired or all measurements are not complete, the program proceeds tothe end at step 730.

From the foregoing description of the “make measurements” program itwill be apparent that this program can be used to control theappropriate computer and equipment at each measurement station to makethe appropriate measurements, then record them and transmit themeasurement data to the FBS computer, and in turn receive a sort penassignment from the FBS computer based on such measurement data.

The next program to be described is the “release animal” program, theflow diagram of which is shown in FIG. 21 and indicated generally at732.

The first step in the release animal programming sequence, at step 734,is to inquire whether there is an animal at the particular station. Ifthere is no animal, the program sequences to command the head gate toopen and the squeeze gate to open at step 736. Then the programsequences to inquire whether the fill sensor is off at step 738. If thefill sensor is not off, the program sequences to the end of the stationrelease program at step 740 and the animal is not released.

If the fill sensor is off at step 738 then the program inquires whetherthe head sensor is off at step 742. If the head sensor is off, then theprogram commands the station setup program to start at step 744 andcompletes its sequencing at step 740. If the head sensor is not off atstep 742, the program sequences to the end of the program and the animalis not released.

If at step 734 of the program sequence there is an animal in thestation, the next inquiry is whether this is a sort pen, at step 736. Ifit is a sort pen, then the program sequences to pass the animal data tothe next station at step 748 and then to turn the status lights off onthe control panel at step 750. Thereafter, the program sequences to step736 to open the squeeze and head gates to release the animal.

If at step 746 in the sequence the indication is that the station is nota sort pen then the program sequences to the next step 752 to inquirewhether the next station is ready for an animal. If the answer is no,the program sequences to the end at step 740 and the animal is notreleased. If the answer is yes at step 752, then the animal data ispassed to the next station at step 748, the status lights are turned offat step 750 and the program sequences to step 736 to release the animal.

The next program to be described, with reference to the flow diagram ofFIG. 22, is the “read ultrasound data” program 754. The first step inthe program sequence is to inquire whether a backfat reading isavailable from the ultrasound computer at step 756. If one is notavailable, the program sequences to the end at step 758. If a reading isavailable, the computer is instructed to read the backfat reading fromthe ultrasound at step 760. Next, the program inquires whether thebackfat reading is good at step 762. If it is not, then the programcommands the computer to turn on the bad reading status light on thecontrol panel at 764 and the program sequences to the end. If thereading is good then the “good reading” status light is turned on at thecontrol panel at step 766. Then the good reading is added to the list ofbackfat readings for that animal at step 768.

After the reading, the program commands the computer at step 770 tocount the number of other readings that are within 0.2 inches, asindicated at step 772. When that has been done, the program sequencesback to step 770 until all such readings in the list have been countedas indicated. When that is done, the program sequences to step 774 andinquires whether there are four or more close readings. If there arefour or more close readings, the next step 776 is to average the closereadings. Then the computer turns on the “backfat complete” status lighton the control panel at step 778 and the program ends.

If at step 774 there are not four or more close readings, then theprogram sequences to step 780 and asks if there are eight or morereadings in the list. If there are not, the program sequences to the endat 758. If there are, the program instructs the computer to clear thelist and reset to start over at step 782 and then sequences to the endof the program at step 758.

The next program to be described is the FBS computer interface program784 described with reference to the flow diagram of FIG. 23. Thisprogram operates the FBS interface indicated at 246 in FIG. 6. The firststep 786 in the program is to send an initialize command to the FBScomputer. The next step 788 in the program is to read a command from theFBS computer. The next 790 step in the program is to inquire whether ananimal data request has been received from the FBS computer. If not, theprogram sequences back to step 788 to await a command from the FBScomputer. If there is no command from the FBS computer or no response,the program sequences back to the beginning to send an initializecommand to the FBS computer.

If at step 790 an animal data request is received from the FBS computer,an acknowledgement is sent to the FBS computer at step 792. Next, theprogram inquires whether data from the next animal is collected yet, atstep 794. If the data has not yet been collected, the program returns tostep 794 to await the collection of data. When data for the next animalhas been collected, the program sequences to step 796 and sends theanimal data to the FBS computer. Next, at step 798 the program waits toread a response from the FBS computer. Then, the program awaits receiptof an animal data acknowledgement from the FBS computer at step 800. Ifnot received, the program requests the FBS computer to resend anacknowledgement. Upon an initialize command or no response from the FBScomputer, the program sequences back to the initial step 786.

If the program receives an acknowledgement from the FBS computer thatthe animal data was received, the program next reads the sort penassignment received from the FBS computer at step 802. Next, at step804, the program inquires whether the sort pen assignment was receivedfrom the FBS computer. At this point if there is an initialize commandfrom the FBS computer or no sort pen assignment from the FBS computer,the program sequences back to the initial step 786.

If there is a sort pen assignment received from the FBS computer, theprogram sends a sort pen acknowledgement to the FBS computer at step806. Then, at step 808 the program commands the computer to update thecurrent animal with its assigned sort pen number, in other words, tocorrelate the new sort pen assignment with the identified animal. Theprogram then returns to step 788, awaiting a command from the FBScomputer.

Finally, there is a program for loading the ECM (cattle managementsystem) station configuration information into the process controlcomputer. This program is diagrammed in FIG. 24 and indicated generallyat 810. In the first step of its sequence the program inquires whetherthis is the end of the configuration file, at step 812. If the answer isyes, then the program sequences to step 814 to check for any missingdefinitions. Then the load configuration program ends at step 816. Ifthe configuration file is not fully loaded, then from step 812 theprogram sequences to read the element definition from the configurationfile at step 818. Then the program determines the definition type atstep 820 and breaks the definition into its components at step 822 andcreates the object specified by the definition at step 824 beforesequencing back to the beginning of the load configuration program.

F. Summary

From the foregoing it will be appreciated that the disclosedcomputerized cattle management system and method provides a highlyflexible system and method for measuring, sorting and processinganimals, either on a group basis or an individual basis or in acombination of group and individual basis. It furthermore proves a meansand method for projecting, on an individual animal basis, when thatanimal will be ready to be shipped from the feedlot to the packing plantfor slaughter and what that animal's optimum finish weight will be. Thesystem also provides a means and method whereby the costs of maintaininganimals in the feedlot can be determined on an individual animal basisso that such costs, on an individual animal basis, can be assessed tothe animal's owners, thereby providing a highly efficient costmanagement tool.

With the management system of the present invention, no longer is itnecessary to treat a group of animals received in a feedlot as a groupthroughout its period of stay in the feedlot. Instead, different groupsof animals as received in a feedlot can be mixed with other groupsregardless of ownership, based on management criteria such as animaltype, DTF, OEW or other factors. Since each animal can be identifiedelectronically at any time and at any place during its stay in thefeedlot, with its ownership easily determined, it can be grouped withother animals with similar physical characteristics or OED's rather thanbeing kept in a common ownership group while in the feedlot. Similarly,when animals are ready for slaughter, they can be sent to the packingplant without regard to ownership because their EID tags will identifythem at packing plant as to ownership and thus costs and proceeds can beproperly assessed and credited without regard to group.

From the foregoing, it should be apparent that a particular animal maybe in one group or lot when it arrives in a feedlot, may be moved to adifferent group within a feed pen during the feeding period, and may besorted into a marketing group different than its pen feeding group whenit is finally ready for shipment to the packing plant. All of this ismade possible by the ability to electronically identify each animal byownership and physical characteristics and costs at any time,irrespective of the group it happens to be in at any given time.

Having illustrated and described the principals of the invention by whatare currently several preferred embodiments, it should be apparent thatthose embodiments can be modified in arrangement and detail withoutdeparting from those principals. I claim as my invention all suchembodiments and variations thereof, and their equivalence, as comewithin the true spirit and scope of the following claims.

TABLE 3A Cattle Received Report by Load Period: Mar. 18, 1994 to Mar.20, 1994 Research Division CIR117 Agri-Research Seq 13 Feeders Page Lot:495 Weight Pen Date Load Average Totals Purchase Cost No. Rcvd. No. HeadSex Pay Rec Shrink Pay Rec Total S/CWT L4 Mar. 19, 1994 1 32 HF 678 6780.00% 21,680 21,680 16,476.80 76.00 AGE YEARLING 160.00 BACKGROUND WHEATPASTURE 100.00 BREED OF FEEDER ANGUS CROSS 25.00 CHAROLAIS 6.25 HEREFORD28.00 HOLSTEIN CROSS 18.75 SHORTHORN X 22.00 DAYS IN PASTURE 154-161100.00 DISPOSITION DOCILE 95.00 HEALTH SCORE EXCELLENT 100.00 MARKETTYPE DIRECT 100.00 NUTRITION WHEAT PASTURE 100.00 STRESS SCORE EXCELLENT100.00 WEATHER/ARRIVAL SUNNY & MILD 100.00 Number of Loads: 1 32 678 6780.00% 21,680 21,680 16,476.80 76.00 HF-HEIFERS 1 32 678 678 0.00% 21,68021,680 16,476.80 76.00 AGE YEARLING 100.00% BREED OF FEEDER ANGUS CROSS25.00% CHAROLAIS 6.25% HEREFORD 28.00% HOLSTEIN CROSS 18.75% SHORTHORN X22.00% BACKGROUND WHEAT PASTURE 100.00% DISPOSITION DOCILE 95.00% HEALTHSCORE EXCELLENT 100.00% MARKET TYPE DIRECT 100.00% NUTRITION WHEATPASTURE 100.00% DAYS ON PASTURE 154-161 100.00% STRESS SCORE EXCELLENT100.00% WEATHER/ARRIVAL SUNNY & MILD 100.00%

TABLE 3B Pen Assignment Summary Source Lot: 495 Source Pen: 59 SortType: DAYS TO FINISH Pen 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lot 495 495 495 Feed Pen 59 57 58Head 10 11 11 Average 98 79 83 STD 38 41 56 Max 154 154 164 Min 36 17 9Range 118 137 155 Projected Finish Weight Average 1066 1093 997 STD 158137 126 Max 1260 1260 1177 Min 830 876 815 Range 430 384 362 CurrentWeight Average 787 875 766 STD 120 66 66 Max 1035 965 843 Min 627 766648 Range 408 199 195 Frame Average 5 6 4 STD 1 1 1 Max 7 7 7 Min 3 3 3Range 4 4 4 Current Back Fat Average .22 .30 .33 STD .12 .11 .19 Max .42.53 .75 Min .09 .17 .12 Range .33 .36 .63

TABLE 3C PEN ASSIGNMENT DETAIL LOT: 495 PEN: 57 Thu Apr. 28, 1994 SortPen: 2 07:35:12 Run Seq: 206 Page 1 EID VID DTF OFW CWT ADG FM BF ShipWindow: May 14, 1994 TO Sep. 28, 1994 16817175 11 16 876 826 3.13 3 0.5316817094 4 32 1004 905 3.09 5 0.41 16817763 22 45 1034 942 2.04 5 0.2516816164 9 59 1089 929 2.71 7 0.22 16814011 5 60 912 766 2.43 3 0.4116816227 24 75 1024 798 3.01 5 0.36 16816430 16 83 1132 897 2.83 7 0.2516815742 28 98 1260 965 3.01 7 0.17 16816005 34 115 1260 931 2.86 7 0.3116814141 19 122 1175 843 2.72 7 0.17 16813043 32 153 1260 824 2.85 50.24

TABLE 3D MARKETING YARD SHEET INDIVIDUAL ANIMAL LEVEL Mar. 30, 1994C1### 17:55:03 page Measurement Date: Mar. 30, 1994 DIV: AGR SEX: HFOwner: Agri Research Origin: Little Type: Crossbred Heifers ProjectedWeights DOF Ration TAG PEN HGp LOT DTF Date OFW YG BE CURR PUR CPD LPDID No. Days 25 59 495 38 0506 815 3.0 117.25 711 678 10 10 8 10 11 59495 46 0514 876 3.0 117.25 757 678 10 10 8 10 15 59 495 53 0522 896 3.0117.25 757 678 10 8 10 18 59 495 59 0527 821 3.0 117.25 668 678 10 10 810 4 59 495 62 0530 1004 3.0 117.25 843 678 10 10 8 10 3 59 495 65 0602848 3.0 117.25 679 678 10 10 8 10 14 59 495 68 0606 904 3.0 117.25 727678 10 10 8 10 22 59 495 75 0612 1034 2.0 117.25 817 678 10 10 8 10 9 59495 89 0626 1089 2.0 117.25 832 678 10 10 8 10 5 59 495 90 0627 912 3.0117.25 679 678 10 10 8 10 17 59 495 92 0630 830 3.0 117.25 576 678 10 103 10 20 58 495 97 0705 972 3.0 117.25 704 678 10 10 8 10 2 58 495 980706 965 3.0 117.25 710 678 10 10 8 10 24 58 495 104 0712 1024 2.0117.25 722 678 10 10 8 10 26 53 495 104 0712 1044 2.0 117.25 742 678 1010 8 10 30 58 495 107 0715 1034 3.0 117.25 755 678 10 10 8 10 13 58 495107 0715 1012 3.0 117.25 733 678 10 10 8 10 16 58 495 113 0720 1132 2.0117.25 805 678 10 10 8 10 21 58 495 113 0720 990 3.0 117.25 697 678 1010 8 10 23 58 495 119 0726 1260 2.0 117.25 915 673 10 10 8 10 28 58 495128 0804 1260 2.0 117.25 890 678 10 10 8 10 29 58 495 128 0508 1090 3.0117.25 738 678 10 10 8 10 34 57 495 144 0821 1260 2.0 117.25 841 678 1010 8 10 19 57 495 152 0828 1175 3.0 117.25 757 678 10 10 8 10 ADG FeedIntake Treats/HD PROCS/Hd TOTALS/Hd TAG PEN HGp LOT CPD LPD ID PCP ACPL7D ID Proj Act Proj Act Proj TD 25 59 495 5.4 .0 5.4 18 22 23 22 1 .005 4.75 6 4.75 11 59 495 5.8 .0 5.8 18 24 25 24 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 15 59495 5.8 .0 5.8 18 24 25 24 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 18 59 495 5.1 .0 5.1 1821 22 2 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 4 59 495 6.4 .0 6.4 18 27 28 27 1 .00 5 4.756 4.75 3 59 495 5.2 .0 5.2 18 21 22 21 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 14 59 495 .6.0 .6 18 23 24 23 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 22 59 495 6.2 .0 6.2 18 26 27 26 1.00 5 4.75 6 4.75 9 59 495 2.4 .0 2.4 18 26 27 26 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 559 495 2.0 .0 2.0 18 21 22 21 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 17 59 495 4.4 .0 4.418 18 19 18 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 20 58 495 5.4 .0 5.4 18 22 23 22 1 .00 54.75 6 4.75 2 58 495 5.4 .0 5.4 18 22 23 22 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 24 58495 5.5 .0 5.5 18 23 24 23 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 26 58 495 5.7 .0 5.7 1823 24 23 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 30 58 495 2.4 .0 2.4 18 24 25 24 1 .00 54.75 6 4.75 13 58 495 5.6 .0 5.6 18 23 24 23 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 16 58495 6.1 .0 6.1 18 25 26 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 21 58 495 5.3 .0 5.3 1822 23 22 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 23 58 495 7.0 .0 7.0 18 29 30 29 1 .00 54.75 6 4.75 28 58 495 6.8 .0 6.8 18 28 29 28 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 29 58495 5.6 .0 5.6 18 23 24 23 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 34 57 495 6.4 .0 6.4 1827 28 27 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 19 57 495 5.8 .0 5.8 18 24 25 24 1 .00 54.75 6 4.75

TABLE 3E MARKETING YARD SHEET INDIVIDUAL ANIMAL LEVEL Apr. 22, 1994C1#### 17:55:11 Page 1 Measurement Date: Apr. 22, 1994 DIV: AGR SEX: HFOwner: Agri Research Origin: Little Tpe: Crossbred Heifers ProjectedWeights DOF Rution TAG PEN HGp LOT DTF Date OFW YG BE CURR PUR CPD LPDID No. Days 25 59 A 495 21 0513 869 3.0 118.39 811 678 24 10 34 6 12 1159 A 495 24 0156 888 3.0 118.04 826 678 24 10 34 6 12 15 59 A 495 320524 896 3.0 117.07 813 678 24 10 34 6 12 4 59 A 495 34 0526 993 3.0117.82 905 678 24 10 34 6 12 3 59 A 495 36 0528 863 3.0 116.01 769 67824 10 34 6 12 18 59 A 495 43 0604 856 3.0 114.76 744 678 24 10 34 6 1214 59 B 495 43 0604 905 3.0 115.60 793 678 24 10 34 6 12 22 59 B 495 510612 1089 2.0 115.92 942 678 24 10 34 6 12 5 59 B 495 56 0617 912 3.0113.99 766 678 24 10 34 6 12 17 59 B 495 58 0619 787 3.0 109.23 628 67824 10 34 6 12 9 59 B 495 68 0629 1127 2.0 114.30 929 678 24 10 34 6 12 258 A 495 68 0629 970 3.0 113.64 793 678 24 10 34 6 12 16 58 A 495 680629 1095 2.0 113.62 897 678 24 10 34 6 12 20 58 A 495 74 0705 988 3.0112.04 785 678 24 10 34 6 12 23 58 A 495 78 0709 1260 2.0 116.07 1035678 24 10 34 6 12 24 58 A 495 82 0713 1035 2.0 110.62 798 678 24 10 34 612 26 58 A 495 82 0713 1038 2.0 110.69 801 678 24 10 34 6 12 21 58 A 49582 0713 962 3.0 111.62 749 678 24 10 34 6 12 30 58 A 495 90 0721 10313.0 112.60 798 678 24 10 34 6 12 29 58 A 495 92 0723 1097 3.0 112.39 843678 24 10 34 6 12 13 58 A 495 94 0725 1055 3.0 112.77 811 678 24 10 34 612 28 58 A 495 102 0802 1055 2.0 113.93 965 678 24 10 34 6 12 34 57 A495 113 0813 1260 2.0 112.65 931 678 24 10 34 6 12 19 57 A 495 115 08151159 3.0 111.58 843 678 24 10 34 6 12 ADG Feed Intake Treats/HD PROCS/HdTOTALS/Hd TAG PEN HGp LOT CPD LPD ID PCP ACP L7D ID Proj Act Proj ActProj TD 25 59 A 495 4.2 5.4 4.6 22 26 25 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 11 59 A495 2.9 5.8 3.7 21 27 25 26 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 15 59 A 495 2.3 5.8 3.321 26 25 26 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 4 59 A 495 2.6 6.4 3.7 21 29 28 29 1 .005 4.75 6 4.75 3 59 A 495 3.8 5.2 4.2 21 25 23 24 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 1859 A 495 3.2 5.1 3.7 21 24 23 23 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 14 59 B 495 2.8 5.53.6 21 26 24 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 22 59 B 495 5.2 6.2 5.5 21 31 29 291 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 5 59 B 495 3.6 5.2 4.1 21 25 23 24 1 .00 5 4.75 64.75 17 59 B 495 2.2 4.4 2.8 21 20 19 20 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 9 59 B 4954.0 6.3 4.7 21 30 28 29 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 2 58 A 495 3.5 5.4 4.0 21 2624 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 16 58 A 495 3.8 6.1 4.5 21 29 27 28 1 .00 54.75 6 4.75 20 58 A 495 3.4 5.4 4.0 21 26 24 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 2358 A 495 5.0 7.0 5.6 21 34 32 32 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 24 58 A 495 3.2 5.53.9 21 26 24 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 26 58 A 495 2.5 5.7 3.4 21 26 24 251 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 21 58 A 495 2.2 5.3 3.1 21 24 23 24 1 .00 5 4.75 64.75 30 58 A 495 1.8 5.8 3.0 21 26 24 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 29 58 A 4954.4 5.6 4.7 21 27 26 26 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 13 58 A 495 3.3 5.6 3.9 2126 25 25 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 28 58 A 495 3.1 6.8 4.2 21 31 29 30 1 .00 54.75 6 4.75 34 57 A 495 3.8 6.4 4.5 21 30 28 29 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75 1957 A 495 3.6 5.8 4.2 21 27 26 26 1 .00 5 4.75 6 4.75

TABLE 3F Pen Closeout Report Research-Division As of Apr. 22, 1994 Lot495 Pen 59 Owner AGRI Agri Research Center, Inc. 100.00 Pounds DollarsItem Head Total Avg /CWT /Head Total INCOME Inventory 10 7,867 787 73.25576.28 5,762.80 EXPENSES Cattle: 10 6,775 678 76.00 514.90 5,149.00HEIFERS Feed and Other: COG /Head Total FEED 50.15 54.77 547.60 CHARGESCATTLE 0.16 0.17 1.70 INSURANCE YARDAGE 1.56 1.70 17.00 PROCESSING 4.354.75 47.40 Sub Total 56.21 61.38 613.80 Feed and Other Total 576.285,762.80 Profit/Loss 0.00 0.00 Performance Data Total Pounds Gained1,092.00 Total Proc & Med 47.45 /Head 109.20 /Head 4.75 Average DailyGain 3.21 Total Deads 0.00 Daily Feed Cost/Head 1.61 % Death Loss 0.00%Daily Total Cost/Head 1.81 % Shrink into Yard 0.00% Total Pounds Fed8,040.86 Total Feed Cost 547.69 Total Pounds Fed/Head 804.09 Avg RationCost/Ton XXXXX Avg Daily Consumption 23.65 Cost of Gain 56.21 WetConversion 7.36 (Deads in) Dry Conversion 6.02 Cost of Gain 56.21 InMar. 19, 1994 Out: (Deads out) Total Head Days 340.00 Average Days onFeed 34.00 SUMMARY 10 HEIFERS In Wt 678 Out Wt 787 Gained 3.21 for 34DOF Cost of Gain: 56.21 Profit 0.00 (Before Interest)

TABLE 3G Close-Out Summary BY LOT LOT: 42894 PENS: 553 HEAD 27 SEX SDATE Apr. 28, 1993 OTAL PFT: $4,957.98 VID PFT TCOG ADG PE QG YG HCW DP% LW PWT DOF FCOG PROC TREAT TCOG SIRE: ANGUS DAM: BRAFORD 567 329.9645.00 3.37 6.31   CH− 4.0 875 66.5 1315 634 202 43.00 11.36 0.00 45.00563 64.18 45.00 3.64 6.25 SE+ 5.0 777 62.8 1238 648 162 42.00 11.36 0.0045.00 564 76.03 57.00 2.97 7.16 SE+ 4.2 736 61.8 1190 590 202 48.0011.36 33.25 57.00 565 233.46 42.00 3.93 5.79 SE− 5.0 915 66.6 1373 736162 39.00 11.36 0.00 42.00 566 122.80 66.00 2.47 9.20 SE− 3.3 699 65.31070 620 182 62.00 11.36 0.00 56.00 AVG 165.29 51.00 3.28 6.94 4.30 80065 1237 646 182 46.80 11.36 6.65 51.00 SIRE: ANGUS DAM: BRANGUS 423151.91 39.00 3.57 5.98 SE− 2.9 731 61.9 1181 460 202 36.00 11.36 0.0039.00 421 296.59 40.00 3.87 5.69 SE− 3.9 811 62.6 1296 592 182 38.0011.36 0.00 40.00 425 74.46 63.00 2.23 9.17 CH 3.2 661 64.7 1022 508 23160.00 11.36 0.00 63.00 420 113.36 43.00 3.23 6.61 SE+ 2.7 693 62.2 1114462 202 40.00 11.36 0.00 43.00 427 282.11 45.00 3.45 6.38 SE+ 3.5 77564.1 1210 582 182 43.00 11.36 0.00 45.00 422 198.62 45.00 3.06 6.97  CH− 3.0 734 64.5 1138 480 215 42.00 11.36 0.00 45.00 AVG 186.18 45.833.24 6.80 0.00 3.20 734 63 1160 514 202 43.17 11.36 0.00 45.83 SIRE:ANGUS DAM: ANGUS 619 254.93 42.75 3.25 7.60 CH 2.3 742 66.6 1114 574 16638.73 10.04 0.00 42.75 616 −129.50 58.02 2.59 9.50 SE   3.0 701 62.91114 558 215 50.27 10.04 19.50 58.02 633 231.38 46.77 3.17 8.50 CH 2.8762 63.2 1205 562 203 43.17 10.04 0.00 46.77 628 222.01 53.51 3.08 8.60CH 2.7 813 65.7 1238 612 203 45.61 10.04 25.58 53.51 661 255.60 43.863.15 7.90 CH 3.7 822 65.3 1258 660 190 40.12 10.04 0.00 43.86 929 154.0552.96 2.58 9.70 CH 4.1 708 63.8 1109 554 215 48.81 10.04 0.00 52.96 AVG164.75 49.65 2.97 8.63 0.00 3.10 758 65 1173 587 199 44.45 10.04 7.5149.65 SIRE: ANGUS DAM: HERF 907 178.77 45.63 3.05 8.20 CH 2.1 741 64.31152 646 166 41.34 10.04 0.00 45.63 908 257.39 42.53 3.60 6.80 CH 2.4906 63.1 1435 652 215 36.16 10.04 25.58 42.53 902 266.58 42.83 3.25 7.70CH 2.9 811 63.7 1181 642 166 38.81 10.04 0.00 42.83 903 181.05 44.143.15 7.90 SE   2.6 788 64.6 1219 696 166 39.99 10.04 0.00 44.14 906203.41 50.74 2.74 9.00 CH 3.1 748 69.6 1075 620 166 45.97 10.04 0.0050.74 905 183.21 42.67 3.26 7.60 SE   2.3 768 63.7 1205 664 166 38.6610.04 0.00 42.67 904 216.42 44.13 3.10 8.10 CH 2.5 809 63.6 1272 606 21540.68 10.04 0.00 44.13 910 171.61 49.23 2.75 9.00 CH 3.0 792 64.4 1229632 215 45.38 10.04 0.00 49.23 911 172.01 50.52 2.75 9.10 CH 1.2 68663.2 1035 628 166 45.77 10.04 0.00 50.52 909 245.58 43.41 3.15 7.90 CH3.8 893 65.0 1373 696 215 40.01 10.04 0.00 43.41 AVG 202.6 45.583 3.0838.13 0   2.6 794 65 1223 649 186 41.277 10.04 2.558 45.583 LOT AVERAGEAVG 183.63 43.34 2.61 6.42 2.91 703 59 1090 548 174 39.60 9.65 3.5843.34 STD 15.02 1.22 3.06 1.21 230 19 356 185 59 13.72 3.11 8.66 15.02MAX 329.96 66.00 3.93 9.70 5.00 915 70 1435 736 231 62.00 11.36 33.2566.00 MIN −129.50 39.00 2.23 5.69 1.20 661 62 1022 460 162 36.00 10.040.00 39.00 RANG 469.46 27.00 1.70 4.01 3.80 254 8 413 276 69 26.00 1.3233.25 27.00

TABLE 4A Feedlot Business System Type in the three letters ahs to startthe Animal Health Program 1. Type FMS 2. TERM = (ANSI) typeway150Feedlot Business System Agri Research Database ver. 4.1 Mar. 03, 1994Enter user ID   Access Micro-System 3. Push the DEL key on the keyboard4. S Type ECM ELECTRONIC CATTLE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 0 - Exit 1 - Performan ECM Session 2 - Modify ECM Session Configuration 3 - Print theResults of an ECM Session 5. Type 1 then press the Enter key ELECTRONICCATTLE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Currently defined Session Types: 1 2 3 4Choose Session Type from above list 6. Type 2 then press the Enter key

TABLE 4B  1—Session Types: 2  2—Description: Demo  3—Process controlcomputer present? [yes]  4—Unused [no]  5—Type of Sorting ? [AR]  6—ReadElectronic Ear Tags? [yes]  7—Insert New Visual Ear Tags ? [no] 8—Cattle Type? [not Recorded]  9—Frame Type? [not Recorded] 10—FleshType? [not Recorded] 11—AGE? [not Recorded] 12—Weight ? [Automatically]13—Back Fat ? [Automatically] 14—Loin Depth ? [not Recorded] 15—RumpHeight? [Keyed In] 16—Rump Width ? [not Recorded] 17—Shoulder Height ?[not Recorded] 18—Shoulder Width? [not Recorded] 19—Top Length ? [notRecorded] 20—Body Length ? [not Recorded] 21—Girth ? [not Recorded]Enter row = to change, 0 to finish or 99 to delete session 7. Type 0then push the Enter key  1—Sort Name: AR  2- Description:  3—SortingCriteria? [Optimum END Date]  4—FLEX Sort? [yes]  5—FLEX pen Number? [3] 6- Sort Pen Count? [3] Number to change—or—0 when finished 8. Type 0then push the Enter key Number of head to be sorted in the Session

TABLE 4C How many Animals should be sorted into each group 1—Sort Pen 1final count  ? 2—Sort Pen 2 final count  ? 3—Flex Pen 3 final count  ?4—Sort Pen 4 final count  ? Number to Change—or—0 when finished 9. Type0 then press Enter key ELECTRONIC CATTLE MANAGEMENT PROGRAM Animal ?? of?? Lot Pen Sort Pen Head Count EID Tag 0 1 0 Frame 0 2 0 Weight 0 FLEX 0Rump Ht. 4 0 Back fat 5 0 OED Dec. 31, 1999 6 0 10. Are these cattle allfrom the same lot? 11. . . . And what is this lot? 12. Are these cattleall from the same pen? 13. . . . And what is this pen? 14. Enter theDate that sorting occurred (usually today's date)? Trying to establishcommunication with Process Control Computer

TABLE 4D Process Control Setup 1. Power on computer C:ECM> 2. Type ECM***ENTER RUN PARAMETERS*** LOG FILE NAME     3. Enter today's date040194 Sort Types: 0—No Sort 1—FBS Sort 2—Weight 3—Days of Feed Sort4—Manual Sort Enter Sort Type == 4. If you Enter 0 go to #9 5. If youEnter 1 go to #16 6. If you Enter 2 go to #17 7. If you Enter 3 go to#37 8. If you Enter 4 go to #60 Sort Type 0 9. Catch Heads (Y N) == 10.Squeeze Animals (Y N) == 11. Weigh Animals (Y N) == 12. Read ElectronicID (Y N) == 13. Do Animals already have EID Tags (Y N) == 14. Read BackFat (Y N) == 15. Take Video Measurements (Y N) == ECM Computer is Readyto go

TABLE 4E Sort Type 1 16. Is this a Flex Group Sort (Y N) == If Y theprogram will Start If N go to step #9 Sort Type 2 17. Minimum Weight forPen 1 == 18. Maximum Weight for Pen 1 == 19. Minimum Weight for Pen 2 ==20. Maximum Weight for Pen 2 == 21. Minimum Weight for Pen 3 == 22.Maximum Weight for Pen 3 == 23. Minimum Weight for Pen 4 == 24. MaximumWeight for Pen 4 == 25. Minimum Weight for Pen 5 == 26. Maximum Weightfor Pen 5 == 27. Minimum Weight for Pen 6 == 28. Maximum Weight for Pen6 == 29. Minimum Weight for Pen 7 == 30. Maximum Weight for Pen 7 == 31.Lot Number == 32. Source Pen Number == 33. Head Count == 34. Breed Frametype == 35. Average Weight == 36. Go To #9

TABLE 4F 37. Sort Type 3 38. Minimum Weight for Pen 1 === 39. MaximumWeight for Pen 1 === 40. Minimum Weight for Pen 2 === 41. Maximum Weightfor Pen 2 === 42. Minimum Weight for Pen 3 === 43. Maximum Weight forPen 3 === 44. Minimum Weight for Pen 4 === 45. Maximum Weight for Pen 4=== 46. Minimum Weight for Pen 5 === 47. Maximum Weight for Pen 5 ===48. Minimum Weight for Pen 6 === 49. Maximum Weight for Pen 6 === 50.Minimum Weight for Pen 7 === 51. Maximum Weight for Pen 7 === 52. LotNumber === 53. Source Number === 54. Head Count === 55. Breed, FrameType === 56. Average Weight === 57. Out Weight === 58. Average DailyGain === Days on Feed??? (calculated by computer) 59. Go To #9 60. SortType 4 61. Go To #9

1. A method for managing animals, comprising: writing software formanaging animals; and providing the software to a feedlot, wherein acomputer system using the software stores information relating to agroup of animals destined for commercial food production, collectscharacteristic data for individual animals, collects at least twomeasured characteristics including a measured weight, determines from atleast in part the characteristic data and measured characteristics aprojected condition for the individual animals, stores the projectedcondition for the individual animals and/or the group, determines forthe individual animals and/or the group a projected feed intake, aprojected gain and an estimated time required to reach the projectedcondition, from at least in part the characteristic data and measuredcharacteristics, the projected condition, feed ration information, andif used, growth promotants, stores a predetermined feed pen animalquantity for multiple feed pens, determines a number of measuredindividual animals per feed pen so that the feed pen animal quantity issubstantially achieved, determines a sort group, which is one ofmultiple sort groups of animals commingled by mixing animals fromdifferent original groups of animals, into which the individual animalsare sorted based at least in part on the estimated time required toreach the projected condition, records a feed pen destination, andselects individual animals or groups for shipment to slaughter utilizingat least in part group and individual projection data.
 2. The method ofclaim 1 where the measured characteristics include at least onecharacteristic selected from an external dimension and an internaltissue characteristic.
 3. The method of claim 1 where the computersystem determines a revised estimated time required for the sort groupto reach a projected condition.
 4. The method of claim 3 where therevised estimated time is based at least in part on actual feed intake,projected gain, production value, production costs, and combinationsthereof.
 5. The method of claim 3 where the computer system correlatesthe revised estimated time with an identification of the sort group. 6.The method of claim 1 where the computer system determines an economicvalue for individual animals.
 7. The method of claim 6 where determiningeconomic value includes projecting marketing dates of animals, utilizingprojected production costs of animals compared to projected market valueof such animals, and using that data to select individual animals orgroups of animals for shipment to slaughter on a date to substantiallymaximize economic return of the individual or group.
 8. The method ofclaim 1 where the computer system determines adjusted formulas forimproving management of future animals from growth performance data offeed pen animals.
 9. The method of claim 1 where the computer systemdetermines and allocates costs for an identified individual animal,determines a disbursement of funds breakdown from a packing plant forthe identified individual animal when the identified individual animalis from a group of animals containing individual animals owned bydifferent original owners, records costs and disbursement amounts, andmatches the costs and disbursement amounts to the identified individualanimal.
 10. The method of claim 1 where the computer system determineslocation information for an individual animal as it moves from a firstlocation to a second location.
 11. A method for managing animals,comprising providing software for a computer system, or a computersystem including the software, to a feedlot, wherein the computer systemusing the software stores information relating to a group of animalsdestined for commercial food production, collects characteristic datafor individual animals, collects at least two measured characteristicsincluding a measured weight, determines from at least in part thecharacteristic data and measured characteristics a projected conditionfor the individual animals, stores the projected condition for theindividual animals and/or the group, determines for the individualanimals and/or the group a projected feed intake, a projected gain andan estimated time required to reach the projected condition, from atleast in part the characteristic data and measured characteristics, theprojected condition, feed ration information, and if used, growthpromotants, stores a predetermined feed pen animal quantity for multiplefeed pens, determines a number of measured individual animals per feedpen so that the feed pen animal quantity is substantially achieved,determines a sort group, which is one of multiple sort groups of animalscommingled by mixing animals from different original groups of animals,into which the individual animals are sorted based at least in part onthe estimated time required to reach the projected condition, records afeed pen destination, and selects individual animals or groups forshipment to slaughter utilizing at least in part group and individualprojection data.
 12. The method of claim 11 where the measuredcharacteristics include at least one characteristic selected from anexternal dimension and an internal tissue characteristic.
 13. The methodof claim 11 where the computer system determines a revised estimatedtime required for the sort group to reach a projected condition.
 14. Themethod of claim 13 where the revised estimated time is based at least inpart on actual feed intake, projected gain, production value, productioncosts, and combinations thereof.
 15. The method of claim 13 where thecomputer system correlates the revised estimated time with anidentification of the sort group.
 16. The method of claim 11 where thecomputer system determines an economic value for individual animals. 17.The method of claim 16 where determining economic value includesprojecting marketing dates of animals, utilizing projected productioncosts of animals compared to projected market value of such animals, andusing that data to select individual animals or groups of animals forshipment to slaughter on a date to substantially maximize economicreturn of the individual or group.
 18. The method of claim 11 where thecomputer system determines adjusted formulas for improving management offuture animals from growth performance data of feed pen animals.
 19. Themethod of claim 11 where the computer system determines and allocatescosts for an identified individual animal, determines a disbursement offunds breakdown from a packing plant for the identified individualanimal when the identified individual animal is from a group of animalscontaining individual animals owned by different original owners,records costs and disbursement amounts, and matches the costs anddisbursement amounts to the identified individual animal.
 20. The methodof claim 11 where the computer system determines location informationfor an individual animal as it moves from a first location to a secondlocation.